Purpose: Communicating scientific results to the public is essential to inspire future researchers and ensure that discoveries are exploited. News stories about research are a key communication pathway for this and ha...Purpose: Communicating scientific results to the public is essential to inspire future researchers and ensure that discoveries are exploited. News stories about research are a key communication pathway for this and have been manually monitored to assess the extent of press coverage of scholarship.Design/methodology/Approach: To make larger scale studies practical, this paper introduces an automatic method to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals. Curated ProQuest queries were used to search for citations to 9,639 Science and3,412 Social Science Web of Science(WoS) journals from eight UK daily newspapers during2006–2015. False matches were automatically filtered out by a new program, with 94% of the remaining stories meaningfully citing research.Findings: Most Science(95%) and Social Science(94%) journals were never cited by these newspapers. Half of the cited Science journals covered medical or health-related topics,whereas 43% of the Social Sciences journals were related to psychiatry or psychology. From the citing news stories, 60% described research extensively and 53% used multiple sources,but few commented on research quality.Research Limitations: The method has only been tested in English and from the ProQuest Newspapers database.Practical implications: Others can use the new method to systematically harvest press coverage of research.Originality/value: An automatic method was introduced and tested to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals.展开更多
We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and ...We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and taking data differences between the Web of Science (WoS) and the JCR into account, we make our own predictions. Using data by cited-reference searching for Thomson Scientific's WoS, we predict 2007 impact factors (IFs) for several journals, such as Nature, Science, Learned Publishing and some Library and Information Sciences journals. Based on our colleagues' experiences we expect our predictions to be lower bounds for the official journal impact factors. We explain why it is useful to derive one's own journal impact factor.展开更多
Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences has been selected for coverage in the Clarivate Analytics products:Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE)starting with volume 10 (1) 2015, online at the Web of KnowledgeTM.
Purpose: This work aims to consider the role and some of the 42-year history of the discipline impact factor(DIF) in evaluation of serial publications. Also, the original "symmetric" indicator called the &qu...Purpose: This work aims to consider the role and some of the 42-year history of the discipline impact factor(DIF) in evaluation of serial publications. Also, the original "symmetric" indicator called the "discipline susceptibility factor" is to be presented. Design/methodology/approach: In accordance with the purpose of the work, the methods are analytical interpretation of the scientific literature related to this problem as well as speculative explanations. The information base of the research is bibliometric publications dealing with impact, impact factor, discipline impact factor, and discipline susceptibility factor.Findings: Examples of the DIF application and modification of the indicator are given. It is shown why research and university libraries need to use the DIF to evaluate serials in conditions of scarce funding for subscription to serial publications, even if open access is available. The role of the DIF for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a good and right journal for submitting a paper is also briefly discussed. An original indicator "symmetrical" to the DIF(the "discipline susceptibility factor") and its differences from the DIF in terms of content and purpose of evaluation are also briefly presented.Research limitations: The selection of publications for the information base of the research did not include those in which the DIF was only mentioned, used partially or not for its original purpose. Restrictions on the length of the article to be submitted in this special issue of the JDIS also caused exclusion even a number of completely relevant publications. Consideration of the DIF is not placed in the context of describing other derivatives from the Garfield impact factor. Practical implications: An underrated bibliometric indicator, viz. the discipline impact factor is being promoted for the practical application. An original indicator "symmetrical" to DIF has been proposed in order of searching serial publications representing the external research fields that might fit for potential applications of the results of scientific activities obtained within the framework of the specific research field represented by the cited specialized journals. Both can be useful in research and university libraries in their endeavors to improve scientific information services. Also, both can be used for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a journal to submit a paper.Originality/value: The article substantiates the need to evaluate scientific serial publications in library activities—even in conditions of access to huge and convenient databases(subscription packages) and open access to a large number of serial publications. It gives a mini-survey of the history of one of the methods of such evaluation, and offers an original method for evaluating scientific serial publications.展开更多
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to introduce a new concept and term into the scientometric discourse and research—scientometric implosion—and test the idea on the example of the Armenian journals. The article ...Purpose: The purpose of this study is to introduce a new concept and term into the scientometric discourse and research—scientometric implosion—and test the idea on the example of the Armenian journals. The article argues that the existence of a compressed scientific area in the country makes pressure on the journals and after some time this pressure makes one or several journals explode—break the limited national scientific area and move to the international arena. As soon as one of the local journals breaks through this compressed space and appears at an international level, further explosion happens, which makes the other journals follow the same path.Design/methodology/approach: Our research is based on three international scientific databases—WoS, Scopus, and RISC CC, from where we have retrieved information about the Armenian journals indexed there and citations received by those journals and one national database—the Armenian Science Citation Index. Armenian Journal Impact Factor(ArmJIF) was calculated for the local Armenian journals based on the general impact factor formula. Journals were classified according to Gl?nzel and Schubert(2003). Findings: Our results show that the science policy developed by the scientific authorities of Armenia and the introduction of ArmJIF have made the Armenian journals comply with international standards and resulted in some local journals to break the national scientific territory and be indexed in international scientific databases of RISC, Scopus, and WoS. Apart from complying with technical requirements, the journals start publishing articles also in foreign languages. Although nearly half of the local journals are in the fields of social sciences and humanities, only one journal from that field is indexed in international scientific databases. Research limitation: One of the limitations of the study is that it was performed on the example of only one state and the second one is that more time passage is needed to firmly evaluate the results. However, the introduction of the concept can inspire other similar case study. Practical implications: The new term and relevant model offered in the article can practically be used for the development of national journals.Originality/value: The article proposes a new term and a concept in scientometrics.展开更多
Background:East Asia is one of the most important economy and research force in the world.However,the trend of published articles in various areas of East Asia has not been reported.Methods:We used PubMed and Web of S...Background:East Asia is one of the most important economy and research force in the world.However,the trend of published articles in various areas of East Asia has not been reported.Methods:We used PubMed and Web of Science databases to search for articles published from China,South Korea,and Japan in 59 nursing journals,from January 2008 to December 2017.Results:The results indicated that Journal of Clinical Nursing is the most popular journal in East Asia and the number of articles published in China has shown a steady upward trend,surpassing Japan and South Korea(from 204 in 2008 to 320 in 2017).South Korea has increased rapidly since 2013(from 65 in 2013 to 144 in 2017).Conclusion:We conclude that China is the most influenced country with the largest number of articles in the field of nursing in East Asia.It is worth noting that the number of articles published in Japan has been slowly declining since 2015.展开更多
The art of constructing an insightful literature review manuscript has witnessed an exemplar in the work of Oz et al(2023),wherein concept progression harmoniously merges with figures and tables.Reflecting on retrospe...The art of constructing an insightful literature review manuscript has witnessed an exemplar in the work of Oz et al(2023),wherein concept progression harmoniously merges with figures and tables.Reflecting on retrospective data science,it is evident that well-cited articles can wield a transformative influence on the Journal Citation Reports Impact Factor score,as exemplified by Robert Weinberg’s landmark on cancer(Hanahan and Weinberg,2011).Here,we aim to spotlight a commendable contribution by Tuba Oz,Ajeet Kaushik,and Małgorzata Kujawska in this issue while pivoting towards identifying the hallmarks of a subpar literature review-elements that hinder rather than promote advancement.The hurdles and roadblocks encountered within subpar literature reviews are multifold.Anticipation of emerging trends,identification of challenges,and exploration of solutions remain conspicuously absent.Original Contributions fail to surface amidst the vast sea of pre-existing literature,with noticeable gaps amplified by the lack of illustrative figures and tables.The manuscript,at times,assumes a skeletal form,reflecting an attempt to accommodate an excess of references,leading to convoluted sentences laden with citations.In contrast,a potent solution lies in adopting a comprehensive approach.A nuanced and critical evaluation of sources can culminate in a robust discussion,surpassing the mere summarization of conclusions drawn by others.This approach,often dismissed,holds the potential to elevate clarity,coherence,and logical flow,ultimately inviting engaged readership and coveted citations.The critical necessity of integrating visionary insights is underscored and achieved through a rigorous analysis of pivotal concepts and innovative ideas.Examples can be harnessed to elucidate the application of these solutions.We advocate a paradigm shift,urging literature review writers to embrace the readers’perspective.A literature review’s purpose extends beyond providing a comprehensive panorama;it should illuminate avenues for concept development within a specific field of interest.By achieving this balance,literature reviews stand to captivate a devoted readership,paving the way for manuscripts that are both widely read and frequently cited.The pathway forward requires a fusion of astute analysis and visionary insights,shaping the future of literature review composition.展开更多
以2009-2011年Web of Science中收录外科学研究文献为分析对象,比较国际合作与国内合作、主导论文与从属论文在提高论文影响力上的不同,以验证国际合作是否能提高科研论文的影响力。通过检验不同国家、不同机构与被引频次之间的关系,开...以2009-2011年Web of Science中收录外科学研究文献为分析对象,比较国际合作与国内合作、主导论文与从属论文在提高论文影响力上的不同,以验证国际合作是否能提高科研论文的影响力。通过检验不同国家、不同机构与被引频次之间的关系,开展了相关性分析和比较分析,了解合作中不同国家所发挥的作用和影响。结果表明,国际合作有利于提高影响力,国内合作效果不如国际合作;合作国家数量与被引用频次之间存在弱相关关系,但相关度高于国内机构数与被引频次,选择合作国家对论文影响力有重要作用。展开更多
文摘Purpose: Communicating scientific results to the public is essential to inspire future researchers and ensure that discoveries are exploited. News stories about research are a key communication pathway for this and have been manually monitored to assess the extent of press coverage of scholarship.Design/methodology/Approach: To make larger scale studies practical, this paper introduces an automatic method to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals. Curated ProQuest queries were used to search for citations to 9,639 Science and3,412 Social Science Web of Science(WoS) journals from eight UK daily newspapers during2006–2015. False matches were automatically filtered out by a new program, with 94% of the remaining stories meaningfully citing research.Findings: Most Science(95%) and Social Science(94%) journals were never cited by these newspapers. Half of the cited Science journals covered medical or health-related topics,whereas 43% of the Social Sciences journals were related to psychiatry or psychology. From the citing news stories, 60% described research extensively and 53% used multiple sources,but few commented on research quality.Research Limitations: The method has only been tested in English and from the ProQuest Newspapers database.Practical implications: Others can use the new method to systematically harvest press coverage of research.Originality/value: An automatic method was introduced and tested to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals.
文摘We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and taking data differences between the Web of Science (WoS) and the JCR into account, we make our own predictions. Using data by cited-reference searching for Thomson Scientific's WoS, we predict 2007 impact factors (IFs) for several journals, such as Nature, Science, Learned Publishing and some Library and Information Sciences journals. Based on our colleagues' experiences we expect our predictions to be lower bounds for the official journal impact factors. We explain why it is useful to derive one's own journal impact factor.
文摘Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences has been selected for coverage in the Clarivate Analytics products:Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE)starting with volume 10 (1) 2015, online at the Web of KnowledgeTM.
文摘Purpose: This work aims to consider the role and some of the 42-year history of the discipline impact factor(DIF) in evaluation of serial publications. Also, the original "symmetric" indicator called the "discipline susceptibility factor" is to be presented. Design/methodology/approach: In accordance with the purpose of the work, the methods are analytical interpretation of the scientific literature related to this problem as well as speculative explanations. The information base of the research is bibliometric publications dealing with impact, impact factor, discipline impact factor, and discipline susceptibility factor.Findings: Examples of the DIF application and modification of the indicator are given. It is shown why research and university libraries need to use the DIF to evaluate serials in conditions of scarce funding for subscription to serial publications, even if open access is available. The role of the DIF for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a good and right journal for submitting a paper is also briefly discussed. An original indicator "symmetrical" to the DIF(the "discipline susceptibility factor") and its differences from the DIF in terms of content and purpose of evaluation are also briefly presented.Research limitations: The selection of publications for the information base of the research did not include those in which the DIF was only mentioned, used partially or not for its original purpose. Restrictions on the length of the article to be submitted in this special issue of the JDIS also caused exclusion even a number of completely relevant publications. Consideration of the DIF is not placed in the context of describing other derivatives from the Garfield impact factor. Practical implications: An underrated bibliometric indicator, viz. the discipline impact factor is being promoted for the practical application. An original indicator "symmetrical" to DIF has been proposed in order of searching serial publications representing the external research fields that might fit for potential applications of the results of scientific activities obtained within the framework of the specific research field represented by the cited specialized journals. Both can be useful in research and university libraries in their endeavors to improve scientific information services. Also, both can be used for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a journal to submit a paper.Originality/value: The article substantiates the need to evaluate scientific serial publications in library activities—even in conditions of access to huge and convenient databases(subscription packages) and open access to a large number of serial publications. It gives a mini-survey of the history of one of the methods of such evaluation, and offers an original method for evaluating scientific serial publications.
文摘Purpose: The purpose of this study is to introduce a new concept and term into the scientometric discourse and research—scientometric implosion—and test the idea on the example of the Armenian journals. The article argues that the existence of a compressed scientific area in the country makes pressure on the journals and after some time this pressure makes one or several journals explode—break the limited national scientific area and move to the international arena. As soon as one of the local journals breaks through this compressed space and appears at an international level, further explosion happens, which makes the other journals follow the same path.Design/methodology/approach: Our research is based on three international scientific databases—WoS, Scopus, and RISC CC, from where we have retrieved information about the Armenian journals indexed there and citations received by those journals and one national database—the Armenian Science Citation Index. Armenian Journal Impact Factor(ArmJIF) was calculated for the local Armenian journals based on the general impact factor formula. Journals were classified according to Gl?nzel and Schubert(2003). Findings: Our results show that the science policy developed by the scientific authorities of Armenia and the introduction of ArmJIF have made the Armenian journals comply with international standards and resulted in some local journals to break the national scientific territory and be indexed in international scientific databases of RISC, Scopus, and WoS. Apart from complying with technical requirements, the journals start publishing articles also in foreign languages. Although nearly half of the local journals are in the fields of social sciences and humanities, only one journal from that field is indexed in international scientific databases. Research limitation: One of the limitations of the study is that it was performed on the example of only one state and the second one is that more time passage is needed to firmly evaluate the results. However, the introduction of the concept can inspire other similar case study. Practical implications: The new term and relevant model offered in the article can practically be used for the development of national journals.Originality/value: The article proposes a new term and a concept in scientometrics.
基金the Shaanxi Province Soft Science Research Project(No.2015KRM120).
文摘Background:East Asia is one of the most important economy and research force in the world.However,the trend of published articles in various areas of East Asia has not been reported.Methods:We used PubMed and Web of Science databases to search for articles published from China,South Korea,and Japan in 59 nursing journals,from January 2008 to December 2017.Results:The results indicated that Journal of Clinical Nursing is the most popular journal in East Asia and the number of articles published in China has shown a steady upward trend,surpassing Japan and South Korea(from 204 in 2008 to 320 in 2017).South Korea has increased rapidly since 2013(from 65 in 2013 to 144 in 2017).Conclusion:We conclude that China is the most influenced country with the largest number of articles in the field of nursing in East Asia.It is worth noting that the number of articles published in Japan has been slowly declining since 2015.
文摘The art of constructing an insightful literature review manuscript has witnessed an exemplar in the work of Oz et al(2023),wherein concept progression harmoniously merges with figures and tables.Reflecting on retrospective data science,it is evident that well-cited articles can wield a transformative influence on the Journal Citation Reports Impact Factor score,as exemplified by Robert Weinberg’s landmark on cancer(Hanahan and Weinberg,2011).Here,we aim to spotlight a commendable contribution by Tuba Oz,Ajeet Kaushik,and Małgorzata Kujawska in this issue while pivoting towards identifying the hallmarks of a subpar literature review-elements that hinder rather than promote advancement.The hurdles and roadblocks encountered within subpar literature reviews are multifold.Anticipation of emerging trends,identification of challenges,and exploration of solutions remain conspicuously absent.Original Contributions fail to surface amidst the vast sea of pre-existing literature,with noticeable gaps amplified by the lack of illustrative figures and tables.The manuscript,at times,assumes a skeletal form,reflecting an attempt to accommodate an excess of references,leading to convoluted sentences laden with citations.In contrast,a potent solution lies in adopting a comprehensive approach.A nuanced and critical evaluation of sources can culminate in a robust discussion,surpassing the mere summarization of conclusions drawn by others.This approach,often dismissed,holds the potential to elevate clarity,coherence,and logical flow,ultimately inviting engaged readership and coveted citations.The critical necessity of integrating visionary insights is underscored and achieved through a rigorous analysis of pivotal concepts and innovative ideas.Examples can be harnessed to elucidate the application of these solutions.We advocate a paradigm shift,urging literature review writers to embrace the readers’perspective.A literature review’s purpose extends beyond providing a comprehensive panorama;it should illuminate avenues for concept development within a specific field of interest.By achieving this balance,literature reviews stand to captivate a devoted readership,paving the way for manuscripts that are both widely read and frequently cited.The pathway forward requires a fusion of astute analysis and visionary insights,shaping the future of literature review composition.
文摘以2009-2011年Web of Science中收录外科学研究文献为分析对象,比较国际合作与国内合作、主导论文与从属论文在提高论文影响力上的不同,以验证国际合作是否能提高科研论文的影响力。通过检验不同国家、不同机构与被引频次之间的关系,开展了相关性分析和比较分析,了解合作中不同国家所发挥的作用和影响。结果表明,国际合作有利于提高影响力,国内合作效果不如国际合作;合作国家数量与被引用频次之间存在弱相关关系,但相关度高于国内机构数与被引频次,选择合作国家对论文影响力有重要作用。
