What Has Changed in the Last Decade in the Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology?

Abstract

Objective: The primary aim of the study was to perform sequential analyses together with a citation analysis on the characteristics of the studies published in the Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology (TAO) in the periods of 2010–2014 and 2015–2019. Methods: The studies published in the indicated periods were reviewed for study type, study topic, language and country of origin. Then, the citation analysis of the articles was performed through the Google Scholar and Web of Science (WoS) databases for the indicated periods. The estimated annual impact factors (EIF) of TAO from 2017 to 2020 were calculated by dividing the total number of citations performed in the projected year to the total number of citable articles published in the preceding two years. Results: The total numbers of articles published from 2010 to 2014 and from 2015 to 2019 were 144 and 214, respectively. In 2010 to 2014, the most frequent study topic was head and neck with case reports ranking highest among study types. In 2015–2019, the most frequent study type had changed to original investigation and topic to general otorhinolaryngology. There was a remarkable increase in the total number of citations in 2015-2019 according to Google Scholar and WoS databases. Also, there was a remarkable increase in the EIF values for 2019 and 2020. Conclusion: Although the increase in the number of citations and impact factor values cannot be appreciated as a single indicator for the success of a journal, the results of the presented study showed a promising advancement in the scientific quality of the TAO, driven by the inclusion of the journal to national and international indexes and by changing the language of the journal to English, as well as the well-orchestrated editorial efforts.

CARE (CAse REport) Guidelines: A Recipe for More Transparent Case Reports

“…There are seminal examples of case reports in the medical literature that have antecedently addressed the beneficial or adverse effects of treatment protocols in specific clinical entities such as the relationship between phocomelia and thalidomide, or propranolol treatment for infantile hemangioma ( 4 , 5 ). Despite, however, the numerous contributions of case reports to the medical literature, controversies have emerged among the scientific community regarding their varying quality and level of evidence, especially in the last 20 years ( 6 ).…”