《中国心理卫生杂志》1987-2019年文章被引分析

目的:分析《中国心理卫生杂志》被引论文特征,为挖掘高质量稿源提供依据。方法:以《中国心理卫生杂志》自创刊日至2019年12月31日刊出的所有论文为研究对象,对被引论文的发表时间、所属学科、作者单位、基金论文指标进行统计分析,并重点描述被引排名前20位的分布情况。结果:《中国心理卫生杂志》自创刊至2019年底共发表论文6689篇,其中至少被引一次的论文数量为5892篇,高被引论文(按照普赖斯定律,确定为被引频次≥32次)数量1202篇,总被引次数153598篇。年度发文被引分布中,2000年-2005年发文的被引数量及被引次数最高;学科分布中,以心理学、基础医学及精神病学被引次数最多;机构分布中,以北京大学、中南大学及北京师范大学发文的被引次数最多;基金资助情况分布中,以国家自然科学基金、国家科技支撑计划及国家攀登计划资助立项的论文被引次数最多。交叉学科及优秀科研骨干资助项目支持的论文数量虽少,但被引次数较高。结论:心理学、精神病学及基础医学是被引用的重点学科,国家纵向课题资助论文质量较高,应积极挖掘交叉学科及优秀科研骨干项目中的优质稿源。     

IS COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY “TOO INSULAR”? A NETWORK ANALYSIS OF JOURNAL CITATIONS

The current study uses social network analysis to explore one aspect of cross‐disciplinary connections in community psychology–citations from articles published in community psychology's main journals (i.e., American Journal of Community Psychology and Journal of Community Psychology ) to allied disciplines in 2009. Results indicate that although community psychology journals cited a wide range of disciplines, their levels of citation to any individual journal in another discipline never exceeded 10% of their total network citations. Additionally, journals in other disciplines did not exhibit many citations to community psychology journals. Observed homophily measures indicate that community psychology journals have more cross‐disciplinary citations than articles published in the flagship journals of clinical psychology, sociology, and public health. However, relative homophily measures suggest that community psychology journals are also far more likely to cite within discipline than expected by chance. Implications and future directions for cross‐disciplinary endeavors in community psychology are suggested.     

The proper use of citation data in journal management

Journal impact factors (IF) are often maligned in editorials found in scientific publications, yet citation data can be used appropriately in journal management. The editors of Laboratory Investigation have found that weekly tracking of citation data for this and other highly ranked pathology journals provides valuable feedback on editorial performance and enables us to predict accurate IFs at least six months in advance. Once the IFs are released, it is useful to quantify the contributions of specific article categories, such as reviews and research articles, to the official IFs. In an ongoing attempt to understand the relationship between article downloads and eventual citations, we also analyze the citation rate of papers that had previously been the most frequently accessed on our web site. Finally, as a measure of editorial judgment, the papers that contributed no citations to the journal’s IF are examined as are the papers that were rejected by Laboratory Investigation (Lab. Invest.) but subsequently published elsewhere. Thus the editors of Lab. Invest. use citation data in several ways to measure our progress in elevating the quality of the journal and understand the citation dynamics of papers we publish, while remaining true to the journal’s fundamental operating premise: Publish high-quality original work relating to the mechanisms of disease.     

《中国临床心理学杂志》1998-2002年论文与作者定量分析

目的:分析<中国临床心理学杂志>1998-2002年刊载的论文,以对该刊的专业水平和刊物特色进行评估时参考.方法:用文献计量学方法统计该刊5年刊载的521篇论文、作者、论著合著率、论文内容、引文的引文量、引文率、引文语种、引文类型、自引率、普赖斯指数、引文时间分布、半衰期.结果:在521篇论文中,排名前10位的作者单位共发表论文166 篇(31.9%),在422名第一作者中,64名发表超过2篇的作者共发表论文163篇(31.3%).论文合著率为87.6%,平均合作度为3.6.内容涉及心理社会因素与疾病的文章为160篇,占30.7%.521篇论文的总引文量为4356条,引文率为99%,平均每篇论文引文8.36条.中文占49.6%,外文(以英文为主)占50.4%,其中期刊类与图书类引文的比例为2.7:1.作者、期刊自引率分别为4.4%,7.7%.普赖斯指数为43%.被引文献的文献峰值(0.0985)为论文发表的第3年,半衰期5.5 年.结论:作为临床心理学的核心期刊,<中国临床心理学杂志>5年中各项指标在不断地提高,将在临床心理学研究领域起到越来越重要的作用.     

Differences in citation frequency of clinical and basic science papers in cardiovascular research

In this article, a critical analysis is performed on differences in citation frequency of basic and clinical cardiovascular papers. It appears that the latter papers are cited at about 40% higher frequency. The differences between the largest number of citations of the most cited papers are even larger. It is also demonstrated that the groups of clinical and basic cardiovascular papers are also heterogeneous concerning citation frequency. It is concluded that none of the existing citation indicators appreciates these differences. At this moment these indicators should not be used for quality assessment of individual scientists and scientific niches with small numbers of scientists.     

Structure of the 2003 impact factor for Croatian medical journal

According to the Journal Citation Report from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), the last year's (2003) impact factor (IF) of the Croatian Medical Journal (CMJ) was 0.943. To determine the factors that contributed to this significant increase in the IF, we analyzed the structure of citations to CMJ in the ISI's publications, Science Citation Index (SCI), and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). Thematic issues generally acquired more citations than regular issues. Furthermore, citation number varied for different article types. The citations to the original scientific articles corresponded to the average number of citations for the current IF value, whereas reviews and especially case reports were cited less frequently, and negatively contributed to the IF of the journal. Only half of all articles published in two previous years were cited in 2003. The majority of these articles were cited once or twice, whereas only 15 articles received more than three citations. Journal self-citations are still an important contributor to the CMJ's IF (39.6%). Their proportion may decrease in time, by further improving the visibility of the journal, and thus acquiring greater number of independent citations. In future, we can expect year-to-year variations in the journals IF. This trend may be positive on a long-term basis, but expectation of a value significantly higher than 1 is unrealistic. CMJ is small general medical journal whose quality-oriented editorial policy may in the long-term result in the increase in the IF.     

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Biomedical Publications and Their Citation Frequency

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in enormous related publications. However, the citation frequency of these documents and their influence on the journal impact factor (JIF) are not well examined. We aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on biomedical research publications and their citation frequency.MethodsWe searched publications on biomedical research in the Web of Science using the search terms “COVID-19,” “SARS-Cov-2,” “2019 corona*,” “corona virus disease 2019,” “coronavirus disease 2019,” “novel coronavirus infection” and “2019-ncov.” The top 200 journals were defined as those with a higher number of COVID-19 publications than other journals in 2020. The COVID-19 impact ratio was calculated as the ratio of the average number of citations per item in 2021 to the JIF for 2020.ResultsThe average number of citations for the top 200 journals in 2021, per item published in 2020, was 25.7 (range, 0–270). The average COVID-19 impact ratio was 3.84 (range, 0.26–16.58) for 197 journals that recorded the JIF for 2020. The average JIF ratio for the top 197 journals including the JIFs for 2020 and 2021 was 1.77 (range, 0.68–8.89). The COVID-19 impact ratio significantly correlated with the JIF ratio (r = 0.403, P = 0.010). Twenty-five Korean journals with a COVID-19 impact ratio > 1.5 demonstrated a higher JIF ratio (1.31 ± 0.39 vs. 1.01 ± 0.18, P < 0.001) than 33 Korean journals with a lower COVID-19 impact ratio.ConclusionCOVID-19 pandemic infection has significantly impacted the trends in biomedical research and the citation of related publications.     

Normalized impact factor (NIF): an adjusted method for calculating the citation rate of biomedical journals

The interests in journal impact factor (JIF) in scientific communities have grown over the last decades. The JIFs are used to evaluate journals quality and the papers published therein. JIF is a discipline specific measure and the comparison between the JIF dedicated to different disciplines is inadequate, unless a normalization process is performed. In this study, normalized impact factor (NIF) was introduced as a relatively simple method enabling the JIFs to be used when evaluating the quality of journals and research works in different disciplines. The NIF index was established based on the multiplication of JIF by a constant factor. The constants were calculated for all 54 disciplines of biomedical field during 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 years. Also, ranking of 393 journals in different biomedical disciplines according to the NIF and JIF were compared to illustrate how the NIF index can be used for the evaluation of publications in different disciplines. The findings prove that the use of the NIF enhances the equality in assessing the quality of research works produced by researchers who work in different disciplines.     

Rank-normalized journal impact factor as a predictive tool

Citation data accumulated on articles from the top and bottom 25 of impact factor (IF)-ranked international journals are compared using 59 international geoscience journals from 1998 and 378 Polish geological papers from 1989–1994. There is a minor risk of being uncited when results are published in high-IF periodicals as the average non-citation rate is 0.88 over a 10-year period in this not very rapidly developing scientific discipline. Similarly, the established error levels in the prognosis of expected citation success versus failure based on the extreme IF quartiles as an evaluation tool is low (at most 12.5). Thus the application of the rank-normalized journal IF as a proxy of real citation frequency and, accordingly, as a predictive tool in the a priori qualification of recently published publications is a rational time- and cost-saving alternative (or at least a significant supplement) to traditional informed peer review. Blanket criticism of using IF for decisions in research funding is therefore at least partly exaggerated. This article has not been presented at the conference “The Past, Present, and Future of the Impact Factor and Other Tools of Scientometrics” held in Warsaw (September 26, 2008).     

2010-2019年中国学者在4种国际知名精神医学期刊的发文分析

目的:了解中国学者2010-2019年在4种国际知名精神医学期刊的发文及被引情况,为国内精神卫生科研人员发表高水平科研论文提供参考。方法:以Web of Science数据资源平台为检索源,检索中国学者2010-2019年在《World Psychiatry》《JAMA Psychiatry》《Lancet Psychiatry》和《American Journal of Psychiatry》上发表的论文,包括论著、评述/述评、综述及通信报告等。通过文献计量学方法分析论文发表的时间、文献类型、被引情况及ESI高被引论文情况。结果:2010-2019年中国学者在4种国际知名精神医学期刊累计发表文章193篇,其中以第一作者或通信作者身份累计发表文章104篇,其中6篇入选ESI高被引论文;文章类型中,论著47篇,通信报告35篇,评述/述评18篇,综述4篇,篇均被引次数分别为37次、17次、20次及35次。结论:2010-2019年中国学者在4种国际知名精神医学期刊发文数量持续增长,篇均被引次数较高,ESI高被引论文不多,部分杂志论著占比不高。     

The use of bibliometric indicators to help peer-review assessment

Inserm is the only French public research institution entirely dedicated to human health. Inserm supports research across the biomedical spectrum in all major disease areas, from fundamental lab-based science to clinical trials. To translate its scientists’ findings into tangible health benefits, Inserm has its own affiliated company, Inserm Transfert, which works with industry. Since 2001, Inserm has been setting up on-line file management software for the evaluation of researchers and laboratories, called EVA (). EVA includes all grant applications, assessment reports, evaluation grading evaluation forms and includes automated bibliometric indicator software that enables calculating, for example, the number of publications, journal impact factors, number of citations, citation index, and number of the Top 1 publications for each researcher of the teams. The indicators take into account research fields, the year of publications, and the author’s position among the participants. Bibliometrics is now considered a tool for science policy providing indicators to measure productivity and scientific quality, thereby supplying a basis for evaluating and orienting R&D. It is also a potential tool for evaluation. It is neutral, allows comparative (national and international) assessment, and may select papers in the forefront in all fields. For each team, bibliometric indicators are calculated for all researchers with permanent or long-term positions (3–5 years). The use of bibliometric indicators requires great vigilance, but according to our experience they enrich the committee’s debates without any doubt. We present an analysis of the data of 600 research teams evaluated in 2007–2008.     

SCI数据库收录体外人工肝研究高被引文章分析

背景：人工肝脏可部分替代肝脏的解毒、合成、分泌和生物转化等主要功能。 目的：运用文献计量学方法分析SCI数据库收录人工肝研究文献的高被引文章。研究其来源国家及机构,来源出版物及研究重点等情况,并寻找各因素之间的关系。 方法：由第一作者以“TS=artificial liver support system or TS=(artificial liver) or TS=(bioartificial liver)”为主题词检索SCI数据库以英文发表的人工肝研究文章。通过阅读文题及摘要,选取引文次数多于100次的33篇文章。数据下载日期为2013年4月15日。 结果与结论：SCI数据库共收录4 144篇人工肝研究相关文章,被引超过100次的前33篇文章发表于1975至2006年期间,其中,20世纪90年代发表的高被引文章较多。最高被引的文章发表于2002年,被引668次,平均每年被引55.67次。33篇文章总被引6 094次,平均被引12.64次。其中,14篇文章发表在20世纪90年代,15篇发表在21世纪初。在这个领域里的高被引文献来源于11个国家,其中美国发表文章最多,有12篇。德国罗斯托克大学发表了5篇文章,美国哈佛大学和美国麻省总医院医院各发表4篇文章。33篇文章发表在18本期刊中,Annals of Surgery (《外科学记事》)及Hepatology (《肝脏病学杂志》)发表的文献数量排在首位,其次为Artificial Organs (《人造器官》)和Biotechnology and Bioengineering (《生物技术与生物工程》)杂志。分析表明,在人工肝支持系统研究文献中,来源于美国优秀学术机构作者发表的文章及发表在影响因子较高期刊的文章容易出现受读者喜欢的高被引现象。     

《北京大学学报》(医学版)2002-2005年载文及引文分析

目的 探讨《北京大学学报》（医学版）栽文的特点，引文的数量特征及其蕴含的情报价值，为进一步提高《北京大学学报》（医学版）论文的学术质量提供量化依据。方法 采用文献计量学方法对2002—2005年《北京大学学报》（医学版）载文、引文进行分析。结果 《北京大学学报》（医学版）2002--2005年4卷24期共发表论著686篇，共有27个栏目；合作论文占载文总数的93．44％，平均作者合作度为4．67；各类基金论文363篇，占载文总量的52．92％；平均出版时滞为195d。平均引文量为12．66条，引文率为96．36％；引文类型主要是期刊和图书，各占95．50％和3．84％；引文语种主要是英语和汉语，各占83．10％和16．85％。结论 《北京大学学报》（医学版）刊登的论文比较新颖，具有科研导向功能，是一本质量较高的医学期刊。     

A 10-year scientometric analysis of the academic publications of the 27 Peruvian Scientific Societies of Medical Students

IntroductionScientific societies at the undergraduate level contribute to the research training of students. Therefore, the aim of the study is to perform a scientometric analysis of the scientific production of the 27 Scientific Societies of Medical Students (SOCEM) between 2011 and 2020.MethodsA scientometric study of documents in journals indexed in Scopus was performed. A search strategy was developed to identify the scientific production of all SOCEMs with institutional affiliation identifier (AF-ID) in Scopus. Data were extracted using a formula developed with the AF-IDs of each SOCEM and exported to the SciVal tool for analysis.ResultsUrrunaga-Pastor was the author with SOCEM affiliation with the highest number of citations: 92. Four of the five authors of the articles with SOCEM affiliation with the highest number of citations were from the San Fernando Scientific Society (SCSF). The journal with the highest number of papers with SOCEM affiliation was Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública. Most of the papers were published in third quartile journals. SCSF was the SOCEM with the highest number of papers: 45, while the Scientific Society of Medical Students of the Universidad de San Martin de Porres (SOCIEM-USMP) had the highest number of citations per paper: 3.9.ConclusionThe number of documents with SOCEM affiliation has been increasing, however, the distribution over the quartiles of the journals has not changed. It’s necessary for public and private institutions to make joint efforts to establish connections to have a greater impact on publications with SOCEM affiliation.     

The future of medical investigation in Mexico

The current situation of clinical research in Mexico is analyzed. The main findings are as follows: 10% of total number of researchers in Mexico are engaged in medical research; there is a highly centralized distribution in the Mexico City metropolitan area; there exists unequal academic development among disciplines, and there is an overwhelming number of researchers in public educational and health institutions. A substantial increase in medical publications during the last 15 years with reasonable citation impact was also found. Several urgent matters to attend were identified, such as financing problems, effect of health services descentralization completed in 1997, and the need to selectively support certain research areas such as accidents, mental health, addictions, geriatrics and chronic diseases.     

干细胞移植治疗脊髓损伤的研究与应用

背景：脊髓损伤是中枢神经系统的严重创伤,一些研究认为,干细胞移植可为脊髓损伤治疗提供新的思路。  目的：利用Scopus数据库文献检索和深度分析功能,对干细胞移植治疗脊髓损伤研究的6年文献资料进行多角度的探讨分析。 设计：文献计量学分析。 资料提取：由第一作者以“neural stem cells (干细胞),spinal cord injury or spinal injury (脊髓损伤),cell transplantation (细胞移植),spinal transection (脊髓横断)”为关键词检索Scopus数据库2006-01/2011-12的相关文献,并将分析结果及资料导出,以文字和图表的形式进行统计和计量分析,描述其分布特征。 入选标准：纳入标准：检索干细胞移植治疗脊髓损伤研究相关的文献。文献类型包括研究原著、综述、会议记录及摘要、快报文章、编辑素材。排除标准：与文章目的无关的文献,大于6年较陈旧的文献,未发表的文章以及需电话追踪和手工检索逐一分析的文献。 主要数据判定指标：以文献的类型、出版时间、发表文献的作者分布、学科类别、机构分布、国家地区分布、来源期刊、及文献被引情况进行相关分析。 结果：Scopus数据库2006/2011收录的文献中共检索到1 080篇干细胞移植治疗脊髓损伤研究相关的文献,研究原著以607篇位居首位,其中有15篇可以确定为经典文献。在时间分布上,文献数量2006/2011总体呈上升趋势,来源出版物呈分散情况。高被引研究原著类文章主要发表在Journal of Neuroscience (《神经科学杂志》)上,目前已发表文献中以美国为主,占全球相关领域发稿量的28.5%。中国在过去6年间在数据库中收录文章总量中排在第2名,共发表212篇相关文章,占全球相关文章的19.6%。 《神经外伤杂志》发表文献量22篇,占全部文献的15.09%。其次为Journal of Neuroscience Research《神经科学研究杂志》21篇。 结论：通过文献计量学方法对来源于Scopus数据库关于干细胞移植治疗脊髓损伤研究的文献进行分析,可为了解该领域的概貌、现状和研究者进一步确定该领域研究的热点难点提供有价值的参考。      

Progress and Prospect: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Papers by Korean Allergists Over Recent Five Years (2009-2013)

Since the establishment of the academic society in 1972, Korean allergists have made continuous efforts to elucidate pathogenic mechanisms and therapeutic advances for allergic diseases. The present study aimed to summarize recent progress and explore future prospects of research performance by Korean allergists. We performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis for research papers published in the Science Citation Index (SCI) or SCI-expanded journals by Korean allergists between 2009 and 2013. Research performance was quantitatively analyzed for the numbers of papers by publication year, research type, and main topic. In addition, the performance was also examined for qualitative indices, such as impact factor and citation number. A total of 1,091 papers were identified. The number of publication increased continuously, with an annual increase rate of 12.3%. Clinical and basic studies were the most frequent types of research, and recently the number of epidemiological studies has increased. By research topic, asthma was the most commonly studied, accounting for 20.9% of the total number of publications. Notably, the amount of rhinitis/rhinosinusitis research has risen steeply in 2013. Qualitative analyses also indicated continuous progress; the median impact factor of published journals increased from 1.918 in 2009 to 2.746 in 2013, yielding an annual increase rate of 7.4%. In conclusion, the present analyses identified a continuous increase in the research performance of Korean allergists over a recent 5 year period (2009-2013), both quantitatively and qualitatively. A more significant contribution is expected in the forthcoming era.     

基于Scopus数据分析多能干细胞研究领域的文章、作者及高影响力机构

文题释义： 文献计量学：是以文献体系和文献计量特征为研究对象,采用数学、统计学等计量研究方法,研究文献情报的分布结构、数量关系、变化规律和定量管理,进而探讨科学技术的某些结构、特征和规律的一门学科。主要应用于科学出版物评价、科研工作评价、学科发展评价、机构评价等。 CiteScore(CS)：即Scopus数据库的核心指标,CS被定义为某期刊前3年发表的文献在统计当年被引用次数除以该刊前3年发表的文献数。CS和JCR中的核心指标影响因子(IF)是同类指标,都是某期刊一定引证时间窗口内论文的篇均被引频次。二者的主要区别有3个方面：①引证时间窗口不同：IF的引证时间窗口为2年,而CS为3年;②IF和CS的分子和分母所包含的文献类型不同：IF分子为期刊所有类型文献被引频次,分母仅计数可被引文献(论文和综述),而CS分母为期刊所有类型文献;③引证数据来源不同：计算IF所用的被引频次来源于WoS,而计算CS所用被引频次来源于Scopus。 背景：多能干细胞为许多疾病治疗带来了新的曙光,各国对该领域的投入和重视都在加强。 目的：为从事多能干细胞研究的中国机构或作者提供参考,促进该研究领域的质量提升与国际竞争力。 方法：利用Elsevier公司出版的Scopus数据库,使用关键词“pluripotent stem cell”OR“pluripotential stem cell”OR“multipotent stem cell”OR“multipotential stem cell”对2014至2018年发表的多能干细胞研究领域的文献进行了回顾性检索,并将检索得到的文献利用分析工具SciVaL和微软软件Excel2007做统计分析,揭示了全球文献产出学者、机构、高影响力论文以及中国的研究现状。 结果与结论：①2014至2018年Scopus数据库共收录多能干细胞研究领域文献18 508篇,领域加权影响因子为1.43,其中医学学科产出6 398篇,领域加权影响因子为1.38,27.7%的文章处于高被引地位,48.4%的文章发表在高影响力期刊上,27%的文献是国际合作完成;②发文量最多的机构是哈佛大学805篇,共有1 732位作者,总被引21 654次。中国科学院发文量排在第4位,一共发表394篇,1 139位作者,总被引5 313次;③发文量最多的个人是来自斯坦福大学的JOSEPH教授117篇,总被引2 878次,H指数74;④5篇被引大于500的论文中,有2篇是综述文献,3篇研究论文;日本有6个机构进入亚洲机构前10位,中国紧随其后有3个,印度1个;中国发文最多的作者是裴端卿教授45篇,总被引864次;⑤结果表明,2014至2018年美国哈佛大学处于领先地位,其产出和影响力都显著,在全球发文最多的10名学者中美国和日本各占3席,德国占据2席,中国在该领域有影响力的学者或机构还有待努力。通过综合分析高影响力研究机构、研究作者、研究文章,为多能干细胞领域的科学研究提供前瞻性思考。 ORCID: 0000-0002-9470-0440(何林) 中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：干细胞;骨髓干细胞;造血干细胞;脂肪干细胞;肿瘤干细胞;胚胎干细胞;脐带脐血干细胞;干细胞诱导;干细胞分化;组织工程     

Articles with short titles describing the results are cited more often

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to evaluate some features of article titles from open access journals and to assess the possible impact of these titles on predicting the number of article views and citations.

METHODS:

Research articles (n = 423, published in October 2008) from all Public Library of Science (PLoS) journals and from 12 Biomed Central (BMC) journals were evaluated. Publication metrics (views and citations) were analyzed in December 2011. The titles were classified according to their contents, namely methods-describing titles and results-describing titles. The number of title characters, title typology, the use of a question mark, reference to a specific geographical region, and the use of a colon or a hyphen separating different ideas within a sentence were analyzed to identify predictors of views and citations. A logistic regression model was used to identify independent title characteristics that could predict citation rates.

RESULTS:

Short-titled articles had higher viewing and citation rates than those with longer titles. Titles containing a question mark, containing a reference to a specific geographical region, and that used a colon or a hyphen were associated with a lower number of citations. Articles with results-describing titles were cited more often than those with methods-describing titles. After multivariate analysis, only a low number of characters and title typology remained as predictors of the number of citations.

CONCLUSIONS:

Some features of article titles can help predict the number of article views and citation counts. Short titles presenting results or conclusions were independently associated with higher citation counts. The findings presented here could be used by authors, reviewers, and editors to maximize the impact of articles in the scientific community.