Measuring the Dissemination Impact of Culturo-Behavioral Science

Culturo-behavior science addresses many of the world's most significant problems and therefore has potential to create world-changing outcomes. Before systems level changes that improve the world can be implemented, however, it is first necessary for the public to know about and take interest in the accomplishments of culturo-behavior science. Measurable evidence that this kind of influence is being achieved is a component of "dissemination impact," an important but often overlooked form of accountability on sciences that target real-world problems. We describe a method for quantifying some aspects of dissemination impact and present data on how much of this impact has been earned by articles published in Behavior and Social Issues. The results provide considerable food for thought about how culturo-behavior science can proceed toward making the strategic pursuit of dissemination impact a component of its evidence-based practices.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42822-022-00120-3.

Clinical studies that initiated the use of spinal opioids for the treatment of pain: A new approach to historical review

Opioids administered into the spinal space by intrathecal or epidural routes can provide potent and prolonged selective analgesia. Compared to the systemic administration of opioids, spinal administration can bring about analgesia with fewer central and systemic adverse effects. For the past 40 years, spinal opioid analgesia has achieved great popularity in various fields of pain treatment. The aim of this work is to identify clinical studies that initiated the use of spinal opioids for the treatment of pain. To determine the historical role of each of the review's studies we used the combination of two factors: the study priority in terms of the time of its publication and the degree of its acknowl-edgement in the form of citation impact. The date of publication was regarded as the primary factor, but only if the count of citations indicated a sufficient acknowledgement by the other authors. The citation impact was assessed as the initial citation count - for period of five years after the year of article publication - and the total count. The selection of studies most important for the introduction of spinal opioids to clinical practice was based on two factors - the study priority in terms of the time of its publication and the degree of acknowledgement in the form of citation impact. The date of publication was regarded as the primary factor, but only if the citation count was indicative of sufficient acknowledgement by other authors. Analysis of the related data shows that the clinical studies initiating the use of spinal opioids for the treatment of pain belong to two groups of authors - Wang et al. and Behar et al. Both studies were published in 1979 and described delivery of morphine into the spinal space, although the techniques of administration were different: Wang et al. injected morphine intrathecally, Behar et al. administered morphine epidurally. The response to these studies was overwhelming -- close to a dozen reports on this topic were published in 1979 and more than a hundred - in 1980-1981. The total citation response to the Wang et al. article reached 699, and that to Behar et al. - 518. Two earlier records (1900-1901) of the use of intrathecal morphine, by Nicolae Racoviceanu-Pitesti and Otojiro Kitagawa, found no following in medical literature for more than three quarters of a century.

Citation impact was highly variable for reporting guidelines of health research: a citation analysis

OBJECTIVES

Over 400 reporting guidelines are currently published, but the frequency of their use by authors to accurately and transparently report research remains unclear. This study examined citation counts of reporting guidelines and characteristics contributing to their citation impact.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Web of Science database was searched for citation counts of all reporting guidelines with a minimum citation age of 5 years. The total citation impact, mean citation impact and the factors contributing to 2- and 5-year citation rate were established.

RESULTS

The search identified 296 articles of reporting guidelines from 1995 to 2013. The mean citations per year was 32.4 (95% confidence interval, 22.3-42.4 citations). The factors associated with 2- and 5-year citation performance of reporting guidelines included the following: open access to the reporting guideline, field of the publishing journal (general vs. specialized medical journal), impact factor of the publishing journal, simultaneous publication in multiple journals, and a male first author.

CONCLUSION

The citation rate across reporting guidelines varied with journal impact factor, open access publication, field of the publishing journal, simultaneous publications, and a male first author. Gaps in citations highlight opportunities to increase visibility and encourage author use of reporting guidelines.

Author gender differences in psychology citation impact 1996-2018

Academic psychology in the USA is a gender success story in terms of overturning its early male dominance but there are still relatively few senior female psychology researchers. To assess whether there are gender differences in citation impact that might help to explain either of these trends, this study investigates psychology articles since 1996. Seven out of eight Scopus psychology categories had a majority of female first-authored journal articles by 2018. From regression analyses of first and last author gender and team size, female first authors associate with a slightly higher average citation impact, but extra authors have a 10 times stronger association with higher average citation impact. Last author gender has little association with citation impact. Female first authors are more likely to be in larger teams and if team size is attributed to the first author's work, then their apparent influence of female first authors on citation impact doubles. While gender differences in average citation impact are too small to account for gender-related trends in academic psychology, they warn that male-dominated citation-based ranking lists of psychologists do not reflect the state of psychology research today.

Citation analytics: Data exploration and comparative analyses of CiteScores of Open Access and Subscription-Based publications indexed in Scopus (2014-2016)

Citation is one of the important metrics that are used in measuring the relevance and the impact of research publications. The potentials of citation analytics may be exploited to understand the gains of publishing scholarly peer-reviewed research outputs in either Open Access (OA) sources or Subscription-Based (SB) sources in the bid to increase citation impact. However, relevant data required for such comparative analysis must be freely accessible for evidence-based findings and conclusions. In this data article, citation scores (CiteScores) of 2542 OA sources and 15,040 SB sources indexed in Scopus from 2014 to 2016 were presented and analyzed based on a set of five inclusion criteria. A robust dataset, which contains the CiteScores of OA and SB publication sources included, is attached as supplementary material to this data article to facilitate further reuse. Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions of OA CiteScores and SB CiteScores are presented in tables. Boxplot representations and scatter plots are provided to show the statistical distributions of OA CiteScores and SB CiteScores across the three sub-categories (Book Series, Journal, and Trade Journal). Correlation coefficient and p-value matrices are made available within the data article. In addition, Probability Density Functions (PDFs) and Cumulative Distribution Functions (CDFs) of OA CiteScores and SB CiteScores are computed and the results are presented using tables and graphs. Furthermore, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and multiple comparison post-hoc tests are conducted to understand the statistical difference (and its significance, if any) in the citation impact of OA publication sources and SB publication source based on CiteScore. In the long run, the data provided in this article will help policy makers and researchers in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to identify the appropriate publication source type and category for dissemination of scholarly research findings with maximum citation impact.

Mapping cross-border collaboration and communication in cardiovascular research from 1992 to 2012

Aims

The growing burden of cardiovascular disease requires growth in research and innovation. We examine world-wide participation and citation impact across the cardiovascular research landscape from 1992 to 2012; we investigate cross-fertilization between countries and examine whether cross-border collaboration affects impact.

Methods and Results

State-of-the-art bibliometric methods and indicators are used to identify cardiovascular publications from the Web of Science, and to map trends over time in output, citation impact, and collaboration. The publication output in cardiovascular research has grown steadily from 1992 to 2012 with increased participation worldwide. China has the highest growth as relative share. The USA share initially predominated yet has reduced steadily. Over time, the EU-27 supra-national region has increased its participation above the USA, though on average it has not had greater citation impact than the USA. However, a number of European countries, as well as Australia and Canada, have improved their absolute and relative citation impact above that of the USA by 2006–2012. Europe is a hub of cross-fertilization with strengthening collaborations and strong citation links; the UK, Germany, and France remain central in this network. The USA has the highest number of strong citation links with other countries. All countries, but especially smaller, highly collaborative countries, have higher citation impact for their internationally collaborative research when compared with their domestic publications.

Conclusion

Participation in cardiovascular research is growing but growth and impact show wide variability between countries. Cross-border collaboration is increasing, in particular within the EU, and is associated with greater citation impact.

Plots for visualizing paper impact and journal impact of single researchers in a single graph

In research evaluation of single researchers, the assessment of paper and journal impact is of interest. High journal impact reflects the ability of researchers to convince strict reviewers, and high paper impact reflects the usefulness of papers for future research. In many bibliometric studies, metrics for journal and paper impact are separately presented. In this paper, we introduce two graph types, which combine both metrics in a single graph. The graphs can be used in research evaluation to visualize the performance of single researchers comprehensively.