Ophthalmology journals and the ether: considering Journal Impact Factor and citation analysis in context

What drives citations of frontier application publications?

A large body of literature exists on analysis of citation and reviews of application of efficiency frontier. However, the reviews that assessed the determinants of citation counts did not focus on frontier applications. We contribute to the literature by identifying the drivers of citations of frontier application publications on Ghana. We employed two-part mixture modelling with inverse hyperbolic sine (IHS) transformation of the second part, which was found to be more appropriate than single equation IHS transformation modelling, for our data. Use of stochastic frontier analysis or data envelopment analysis did not drive citations counts. However, quality of journals in which frontier application studies were published and accessibility of the journals to readers, drive citation counts. Authors, institutions and funders of studies on frontier applications may consider these over collaborations, in seeking growth in citation counts.

Publication outcome of abstracts submitted to the American Academy of Ophthalmology meeting

Objective

Abstracts submitted to meetings are subject to less rigorous peer review than full-text manuscripts. This study aimed to explore the publication outcome of abstracts presented at the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) annual meeting.

Methods

Abstracts presented at the 2008 AAO meeting were analyzed. Each presented abstract was sought via PubMed to identify if it had been published as a full-text manuscript. The publication outcome, journal impact factor (IF), and time to publication were recorded.

Results

A total of 690 abstracts were reviewed, of which 39.1% were subsequently published. They were published in journals with a median IF of 2.9 (range 0–7.2) and a median publication time of 426 days (range 0–2,133 days). A quarter were published in the journal Ophthalmology, with a shorter time to publication (median 282 vs. 534 days, p=0.003). Oral presentations were more likely to be published than poster presentations (57.8% vs. 35.9%, p<0.001) and in journals with higher IFs (3.2 vs. 2.8, p=0.02). Abstracts describing rare diseases had higher publication rates (49.4% vs. 38.0%, p=0.04) and were published in higher IF journals (3.7 vs. 2.9, p=0.03), within a shorter period of time (358 vs. 428 days, p=0.03). In multivariate analysis, affiliation with an institute located in the United States (p=0.002), abstracts describing rare diseases (p=0.03), and funded studies (p=0.03) were associated with publication in higher IF journals.

Conclusions

Almost 40% of abstracts were published. Factors that correlated with publication in journals with higher IF were a focus on rare diseases, affiliation with a US institute, and funding.

Citation Analysis of Keratoconus 1900-2013: The Most Influential Publications, Authors, Institutions, and Journals

PURPOSE

The objectives of this study were to identify the 250 most highly cited publications on keratoconus and to identify trends in topics and distinguish the most influential authors, journals, and institutions in the field.

DESIGN

This was a database study.

METHODS

The authors searched the Web of Science database using the keyword "keratoconus." The results were refined to articles and reviews only, years 1900 to 2013, and sorted by citation count. The 250 most cited, relevant publications to keratoconus were identified, and citation analysis of the authors, topics, journals, institutions, and countries was performed.

RESULTS

From the 3030 records identified, the most cited 250 publications were all published in the last 60 years. Publication numbers rose exponentially from the early 1960s, and citation rates have mirrored this. For the 250 most cited publications, the top 25 authors contributed to 60.2% (mean, 6.1 ± 2.3 publications per author), and the top 25 institutions contributed to 57.6%. The mean citation count per article was 80.7 ± 62.4. Twelve journal titles contained 89.2% of the 250 most cited articles, and greater than 47.6% of publications originated from the United States. The major subtopics were corneal transplantation (31.2%), diagnostic instruments (17.6%), and structural and molecular analyses (17.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

There has been an exponential increase in the body of knowledge on keratoconus in the last 60 years. This interest has been driven by refractive surgery related keratectasia, the emergence of better imaging technologies, and effective treatments.