The level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality: a comparison to the impact factor

Weale, Andy R.; Bailey, Mick; Lear, P. A.

doi:10.1186/1471-2288-4-14

Cited by 133 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Review articles have the higher probability of getting cited than original articles (Weale et al, 2004;Kianifar et al) and inflate the impact factor of journals. In our study, the Journal Advances in Anatomy Embryology and Cell Biology only publishes 3 review articles (between 2012 and 2013), and they also were indexed as Book Chapter, because this journal has an ISSN number (0301-5556) and at the same time an ISBN number (Print: 978-3-642-33310-1, Online: 978-3-642-33311-8).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Score, and SCImago Journal Rank Indicator in Anatomy and Morphology Journals

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Score, and SCImago Journal Rank Indicator in Anatomy and Morphology Journals

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Assim, o fator de impacto, que é visto como um indicador da visibilidade e difusão de conhecimento científico, é basicamente uma razão entre citações e itens publicados passíveis de citação. Sua força reside sobretudo na abrangência, estabilidade e aparente reprodutibilidade; por outro lado, algumas falhas óbvias, junto com seu uso leviano, provocaram uma torrente de críticas e discussões controversas sobre sua exatidão 6,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . A Thomson Scientific, antes conhecida por Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), calcula e publica, no Journal Citation Reports, o fator de impacto dos 7.500 periódicos mais citados do mundo, que empregam a revisão por pares, em aproximadamente 200 áreas.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Brazilian knowledge production in the field of child and adolescent health

Blank¹,

Rosa²,

Gurgel³

et al. 2006

J Pediatr (Rio J)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To assess (a) the trend of MEDLINE citation of pediatrics articles associated with Brazilian institutions from 1990 through 2004; (b) the number of Brazilian pediatrics articles published in journals with the highest impact factor; and (c) the regional distribution of institutions.Methods: PubMed search limited to ages 0 to 18 years, English language, MEDLINE and humans subsets, Brazilian affiliation. For each year, we compared the articles retrieved to the whole of MEDLINE citations with the same search limits, except for affiliation, as well as to the total Brazilian scientific production cited in MEDLINE, without age limits. We made a descriptive analysis, and used the chi-square test for trend. Data concerning publication in journals with the highest impact factor were aggregated into three-year periods.Results: A total of 7,222 Brazilian pediatrics articles were listed in MEDLINE from 1990 through 2004, corresponding to 0.95% of all articles concerning the age group from 0 to 18 years. There was a fivefold increase in the absolute number of Brazilian articles along the study period. The ratio of Brazilian to total articles increased from 0.51 to 1.60% (p < 0.01). Scientific knowledge production remains strongly concentrated in the Southeast of Brazil.Conclusion: Brazilian research activities in pediatrics have had a steady upward trend, which relates to the proportional growth of the Brazilian scientific production as a whole.J Pediatr (Rio J). 2006;82(2):97-102: Knowledge production, pediatric research, bibliometrics, impact factor. ResumoObjetivos: Verificar (a) a tendência das citações de artigos de pediatria oriundos de instituições brasileiras, no MEDLINE, de 1990 até 2004; (b) o número de artigos publicados em periódicos com os maiores fatores de impacto; e (c) a distribuição regional das instituições.Métodos: Busca no PubMed com os seguintes limites: idade de 0 a 18 anos, língua inglesa, subconjuntos MEDLINE e humanos, afiliação brasileira. Para cada ano, comparamos os artigos encontrados com o total de citações no MEDLINE, obedecendo aos mesmos limites de busca, com exceção da afiliação; o mesmo foi feito com o total da produção científica brasileira citada no MEDLINE, sem limites de idade. Realizamos uma análise descritiva, usando o teste qui-quadrado para a tendência. Agregamos os dados relativos à publicação em periódicos com os maiores fatores de impacto em períodos de 3 anos. Resultados:Entre 1990 e 2004, o MEDLINE citou 7.222 artigos de pediatria brasileiros, correspondendo a 0,95% de todos os artigos tratando da faixa etária de 0 a 18. O número absoluto de artigos brasileiros aumentou cinco vezes durante esse período. A fração de artigos brasileiros em relação ao número total de artigos aumentou de 0,51 a 1,60% (p < 0,01). A produção científica permanece fortemente concentrada na Região Sudeste do Brasil.Conclusão: As atividades brasileiras de pesquisa em pediatria demonstram uma tendência ascendente constante, proporcional ao crescimento de toda a produção científica bras...

show abstract

“…Consequently, the cited studies are outnumbered by the non-cited by a factor 13 which is what we would expect knowing that a considerable part of all publications are never cited even within the health sciences (see e.g. Ranasinghe et al 2015, Weale, Bailey, andLear 2004). As we would expect pairs with a zero age difference 0 exhibit very few cited studies and many more non-cited studies, since only rarely will a study be able to cite another study published in the same year.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 84%

Statistical analyses of digital collections

Frandsen

Nicolaisen

2017

libellarium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using statistical methods to analyse digital material for patterns makes it possible to detect patterns in big data that we would otherwise not be able to detect. This paper seeks to exemplify this fact by statistically analysing a large corpus of references in systematic reviews. The aim of the analysis is to study the phenomenon of non-citation: Situations where just one (or some) document(s) are cited from a pool of otherwise equally citable documents. The study is based on more than 120,000 cited studies, and a total number of non-cited studies of more than 1.6 million. The number of cited studies is found to be much smaller than the number of non-cited. Also, the cited and non-cited studies are found to differ in age. Very recent studies tend to be non-cited whereas the cited studies are rarely of recent age (e.g. within the same year). The greatest differences are found within the first 10 years. After 10 years the cited and non-cited studies tend to be more similar in terms of age. Separating the data set into different sub-disciplines reveals that the sub-disciplines vary in terms of age of cited vs. non-cited references. Some fields may be expanding and the number of published studies is thus growing. Consequently, cited and non-cited studies tend to be younger. Other fields may be more slowly progressing fields that use a greater proportion of the older literature within the field. These field differences manifest themselves in the average age of references.

show abstract

The level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality: a comparison to the impact factor

Cited by 133 publications

References 15 publications

Comparison between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Score, and SCImago Journal Rank Indicator in Anatomy and Morphology Journals

Comparison between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Score, and SCImago Journal Rank Indicator in Anatomy and Morphology Journals

Brazilian knowledge production in the field of child and adolescent health

Statistical analyses of digital collections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About