Impact factors and publication times for plastic surgery journals

Publication Times and Impact Factors (IFs) in Dentistry Journals

INTRODUCTION

 The speed of manuscript publication in reputable journals plays a crucial role in spreading scientific novelties and may influence the number of received citations. In the present study, the authors investigated the publication speed of dentistry journals. This is crucial for both authors, who desire rapid dissemination of their findings, and patients in need, who seek new therapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 This was a cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of published dentistry journals. A list of dentistry journals featured in the 2021 Journal Citation Report was downloaded. A total of five random original articles were extracted from each of these journals. These articles were published between January and December 2020. Median and interquartile range (IQR) times from submission to acceptance, publication in print, online publication, time from acceptance to in print and online publication were calculated. The correlation between publication times and journal impact factor (IF) was examined.

RESULTS

 A total of 89 journals were included. Individual time from submission to acceptance (peer review time) ranged from 6 to 279 days, the combined median peer review time was 115 (80-159) days. The overall median time from acceptance to online or print publication was 17 (12-38) and 153 (92-249) days, respectively. Journals with available data concerning publication times tended to have higher IF than others. Only journals that did not have available time from acceptance to online publication had higher IF. There were negative correlations between times from submission (r = -0.442, p = 0.007), acceptance (r = -0.616, p < 0.001) to in-print publication, and IF. There were no correlations between IF and time from submission to acceptance, acceptance to online publication, and submission to online publication.

CONCLUSIONS

 Publication times availability was revealed to be an indicator of higher impacted journals, which is a potential new exponent of journal quality. Higher IF values were associated with shorter times from submission to acceptance and in-print publication, which is consistent with current editorial policies.

Need for Speed: Investigating Publication Times and Impact Factors of Plastic Surgery Journals

Background:

Prolonged publishing time in scientific journals can be discouraging for researchers because earlier publication can mean a higher h-index and more academic opportunities. In this study, we evaluated the publication time for articles in plastic surgery journals compared with journals in surgery and medicine. We also assessed correlations between publication speed and journal impact factors (IFs).

Methods:

The overall indexes of all plastic surgery journals were compared with journals in the discipline of surgery and medicine. In addition, we evaluated original articles published in all plastic surgical journals and the highest-ranking journals from various surgical subspecialties listed in the 2018 Journal Citation Report, assessing the time intervals from submission to publication, submission to acceptance, and acceptance to publication. Correlation between time interval and journal IF were analyzed.

Results:

A total of 18 plastic surgery journals were compared with 210 surgical journals. Our study found that the IFs of journals significantly affect submission-to-acceptance times of the articles (P < 0.05, Wilcoxon test). The median submission-to-publication time for all plastic surgery and all surgical journals was 29.7 weeks (IQR, 12.1 and 35.8) and 22.1 days (IQR,18.8 and 36.8), respectively.

Conclusions:

There is a significant submission to publication time lag in plastic surgery journals when compared with other nonplastic-surgery journals. There was a positive correlation between submission-to publication time and IF for plastic surgery journals but a negative correlation for surgery journals (Spearman Correlation). In the last 14 years, plastic surgery journals have remained slow in publishing articles.

Publication Times in Ophthalmology Journals: The Story of Accepted Manuscripts

Introduction: The process of scientific publishing changed greatly in the past decades. The authors aimed to get insight into the time required for articles to be accepted and released online in high-impacted ophthalmology journals.

Methods: Comprehensive review of all original articles published by eight ophthalmology journals during a one-year period was performed for 2020 and 2005. Time taken from submission to acceptance and the first online release of the article was abstracted and analyzed.

Results: A total of 3110 articles were reviewed. In 2020, the overall median time from submission to acceptance (AT) was 119 days (IQR 83-168) and 30 days (10-71) from acceptance to the first online release of the article (OP). AT increased by 7.3% from 2005 to 2020, whereas OP reduced by 73%. Publications, which the corresponding author was affiliated with US-located institution had shorter both AT and OP in 2005 and 2020. The author’s specialty in ophthalmology had an inconclusive impact on AT and OP. Papers with multiple affiliated institutions had shorter AT and OP in both 2005 and 2020; however, these differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: This study demonstrated that increasing pressure on authors, editors, and reviewers to publish articles and journals with high impact factor (IF) significantly influenced publication times in ophthalmology journals. Inflation of research papers was associated with rising AT time. A significant decrease in OP time was potentially explained by the editor’s demand to achieve decent journal IF. This article brings to light relative publication times in the ophthalmology scientific journals.

A bibliometric analysis of the spine journals

BACKGROUND

Spine is a rapidly growing branch with fully-dedicated peer-reviewed journals. Journal impact factor (JIF), speed of publication, and readership are some critical factors affecting the author's choice for submission. This study aimed to find the bibliometric data of spine journals.

METHOD

Fourteen Spine journals in NCBI (National centre for Biotechnology information, USA) database, meeting the inclusion criterion were analyzed for original articles, collected via stratified sampling from each issue of the journal. The dates to submission (DS), acceptance (DA), and publication (DP), study design, corresponding author's details like-subject specialization and country of affiliation were recorded for each original article. Data on JIF, number of issues/years, open access availability (OA), article processing charges (APC) were also retrieved. Correlation and geographic plot were used to display the findings.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range) time for submission to publication/total time (TT) in spine journals was 175 (120-313) days with a submission to acceptance time of 107 (66-168) days and acceptance to publication time of 54 (20-170). Fifty-seven percent of the journals had APC, and all had options for OA. A significant correlation was noted between all determinants of publication speed and the Scimago Journal rankings (SJR) (AT: r = 0.238, PT: r = 0.074, TT: r = 0.288, p < 0.001). Amongst the author affiliations, the USA (37.5%) and Japan (18.6%) had the maximum contributions. Furthermore, 57.4% of authors were orthopaedicians, and 14.4% were neurosurgeons. Retrospective and prospective cohort studies were the standard study designs (48% vs. 20.9%), while clinical trials accounted for 5.8%.

CONCLUSION

Spine journals had comparable publication speed with other biomedical journals; all spine journals had OA options. Observational study dominates the pattern in spine research. The contribution is mainly from orthopaedician, but the trend is changing towards collaborative research with neurosurgeons.

The Evolving Trends in the Impact Factor of Plastic Surgery Journals: A 22-Year Analysis

BACKGROUND

The journal impact factor (IF) is one of the most widely adopted metrics to assess journal value. We aimed to investigate the trends in the IF and ranking of plastic surgery journals (PSJs) over a 22-year period.

METHODS

The Journal Citation Report 2018 was used to identify all journals within the field of plastic surgery from 1997 to 2018. We analyzed the IF of PSJs and that of the category surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 34 PSJs were identified. The mean IF increased from 0.584 (median, 0.533) in 1997 to 1.58 (median, 1.399) in 2018 (P < 0.0001). Over the same time, the median IF of the journals in the category surgery increased from 0.914 to 1.883. The mean journal IF percentile of PSJs within surgery remained fairly stable (P = 0.999). A strong positive correlation was identified between the IF of PSJs and both the 5-year IF (r = 0.943, P < 0.0001) and the immediacy index (r = 0.736, P < 0.0001). The percentage of self-citations across the study period was fairly stable at a mean of 19.2%. A weak positive correlation was found between the IF and the percentage of self-citations (r = 0.171, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The mean journal IF in PSJs has been trending upward over the last 22 years. Ranking of PSJs IF within the category surgery has remained unchanged. The self-citation rate has been fairly stable and correlated weakly with the IF. A strong positive correlation exists between the IF and both the immediacy index and the 5-year IF.

Citation Skew in Plastic Surgery Journals: Does the Journal Impact Factor Predict Individual Article Citation Rate?

BACKGROUND

Citation skew refers to the unequal distribution of citations to articles published in a particular journal.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess whether citation skew exists within plastic surgery journals and to determine whether the journal impact factor (JIF) is an accurate indicator of the citation rates of individual articles.

METHODS

We used Journal Citation Reports to identify all journals within the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. The number of citations in 2018 for all individual articles published in 2016 and 2017 was abstracted.

RESULTS

Thirty-three plastic surgery journals were identified, publishing 9823 articles. The citation distribution showed right skew, with the majority of articles having either 0 or 1 citation (40% and 25%, respectively). A total of 3374 (34%) articles achieved citation rates similar to or higher than their journal's IF, whereas 66% of articles failed to achieve a citation rate equal to the JIF. Review articles achieved higher citation rates (median, 2) than original articles (median, 1) (P < 0.0001). Overall, 50% of articles contributed to 93.7% of citations and 12.6% of articles contributed to 50% of citations. A weak positive correlation was found between the number of citations and the JIF (r = 0.327, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Citation skew exists within plastic surgery journals as in other fields of biomedical science. Most articles did not achieve citation rates equal to the JIF with a small percentage of articles having a disproportionate influence on citations and the JIF. Therefore, the JIF should not be used to assess the quality and impact of individual scientific work.

Online Resources in Plastic Surgery Education: A Toolbox for Modern Trainees and Plastic Surgeons

Plastic surgery is a rapidly evolving field that requires novel approaches in providing continuous and dynamic educational resources to address the increasing time and skill demands from residents. Online resources in their various forms, such as books, journals, simulators, and applications, are increasingly used by residents, notably over traditional print and in-person counterparts. In this digital era, it is imperative to understand the scope and utility of online resources that have the potential to revolutionize plastic surgery education. In this review article, we first discuss the current model of plastic surgery education and the challenges of meeting its goals and then suggest reasons by which online resources close this gap. We also offer an exposition on the benefits of distinct types of resources and current trends regarding their use. Our goal is to create a framework within which learners and educators are able to organize online resources in plastic surgery.

A comparison of the academic impact of plastic surgery units in the United Kingdom and Ireland using bibliometric analysis

Academic output is just one aspect of a successful career as a plastic surgeon. However, for those with a strong interest in academia, the academic output of a department will likely be a key factor when deciding how to rank jobs. The aim of this study was to quantify and rank the academic output of plastic surgery units across the UK and Ireland. The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science Bibliometric analysis tool was used to collate cumulative (1950-2016), 10 year (2006-2016) and 3 years (2013-2015) research output data for plastic surgery units in the UK and Ireland. Sixty-six plastic surgery units were identified. Departments were ranked for each time period according to the number of papers produced, number of citations (Nc) and h-index (a measure of the impact of scientific output). The top 3 departments for number of papers in the last 10 years were The Royal Free Hospital, London (226) Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford (218), and Morriston Hospital and Swansea (188). The top 3 for h-number were The Royal Free Hospital (21) Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester (18) and Morriston Hospital (17). Academic output varies across plastic surgery units in the UK and Ireland. A number of departments have consistently maintained high academic outputs across the years and will be of interest to surgeons hoping to pursue a career in academia.

Trends in Rhinoplasty Research: A 20-Year Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Rhinoplasty is a popular aesthetic and reconstructive surgical procedure. It is one of the top five surgical cosmetic procedures performed worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate global trends in rhinoplasty research spanning 20 years between 1994 and 2013.

METHODS

The top 15 plastic surgery and otolaryngology journals containing rhinoplasty research were determined using impact factors (IF). A database of rhinoplasty articles from 1994 to 2013 was created to include the following classifications: IF, authors' geographic location, study design, level of evidence (LOE), and pertinence to aesthetic or reconstructive rhinoplasty. Productivity index and productivity share were calculated for each region.

RESULTS

A total of 1244 rhinoplasty articles were included in the database. The mean IF among the 15 journals increased from 0.75 in 1994 to 1.90 in 2013 (p < 0.001). The majority of rhinoplasty publications were clinical in study design (91.0%) and were predominantly of weaker LOE (level IV: 42.4%; level V: 33.2%). The USA led in proportion of total rhinoplasty publications by volume and productivity index (37.9%, 41.2%), followed by Asia (29.1%, 28.2%) and Western Europe (18.8%, 18.2%). The majority of articles published were classified as aesthetic (60.4%), whereas 30.6% were reconstructive; there was a significant increase in the proportion of aesthetic rhinoplasty articles published per year (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

The USA has consistently been the most productive country in rhinoplasty research. However, its lead has diminished over the last 20 years. The trend in rhinoplasty research appears to be toward aesthetic rather than reconstructive topics. Attention should be given to producing stronger LOE studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Breast Microsurgery in Plastic Surgery Literature: A 21-Year Analysis of Publication Trends

Introduction Microsurgical reconstruction of the breast represents an area of continual evolution, as new autologous flaps are introduced and principles are refined. This progression can be demonstrated by bibliometric analysis of the scientific literature. Methods The top 10 plastic surgery journals were determined by impact factor (IF). Each issue of every journal from 1993 to 2013 was accessed directly, and all articles discussing microsurgery on the female breast were classified by authors' geographic location, study design, and level of evidence (LOE, I-V). The productivity index and productivity share of each geographic region was calculated based on number of articles published and IF. Results A total of 706 breast microsurgery articles were analyzed. There was a significant increase in microsurgical breast research (p < 0.01), with an average 33.6 ± 31.1 articles per year and a mean increase of 4.4 articles per year. Most research was of lower LOE, with level I constituting 0.14% and level II constituting 5.21% of all articles. United States contributed the most research with 336.4 articles, followed by Western Europe with 242.2. However, Western Europe experienced the greatest increase in productivity share, with + 0.50 ± 0.29 growth, while United States demonstrated the greatest decrease in productivity share with - 1.23 ± 0.31 growth. Among autologous flaps, transverse rectus abdominis muscle research had the greatest yearly publication volume until 2002, when overtaken by deep inferior epigastric perforator flap research. Conclusion Over the 21-year study period, the United States not only contributed the greatest volume of research on female breast microsurgery but also demonstrated the greatest decline in research productivity. Efforts should be made to increase the LOE in breast microsurgery research.

Impact Factors und Publikationszeitspannen kinder- und jugendpsychiatrischer Journals

Zusammenfassung: Fragestellung: Der Impact Factor (IF) einer wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift hat eine wichtige Bedeutung für die Überlegung eines Wissenschaftlers, seine Forschungsergebnisse dort zu publizieren. Ebenso ist die Publikationsspanne, d.h. die Zeit, die vom Einreichen eines Artikels bis zur endgültigen Publikation vergeht, für den Autor von Interesse. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird deshalb eine Übersicht über IF und Publikationsspannen deutscher und internationaler kinder- und jugendpsychiatrischer Zeitschriften gegeben. Methodik: Es wurde eine Datenbankrecherche in den Journal Citation Reports hinsichtlich IF und IF-Entwicklung der einschlägigen kinder- und jugendpsychiatrischen Zeitschriften 2002-2007 sowie eine Per-Hand-Auswertung dieser Zeitschriften hinsichtlich der Publikationsspannen für das Jahr 2007 durchgeführt. Ergebnisse: Aktuell existieren neun kinder- und jugendpsychiatrische Fachzeitschriften, von denen acht über einen IF verfügen. Die Spannbreite der IF bewegt sich von 0,419 (Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie) bis 4,655 (Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry). Die Publikationsspannen betrugen zwischen 5,4 und 13,2 Monaten. Schlussfolgerungen: Obwohl die Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie als «kleines Fach» gilt, verfügt sie über Zeitschriften mit international konkurrenzfähigem IF. Die beiden deutschsprachigen Zeitschriften zeigen einen eher niedrigen IF. Die Publikationsspannen sind angemessen und könnten durch Online-Vorabpublikationen noch verkürzt werden.