中华眼科杂志2005至2009年刊出论文被引情况分析

目的利用文献计量学方法研究中华眼科杂志2005至2009年刊出论文的学术水平和期刊质量.方法依据<中国生物医学期刊引文数据库>(CMCI)提供的资料和数据,采用文献计量学方法,对中华眼科杂志2005至2009年刊出论文被来源期刊引用的情况进行统计分析及评价.结果2005至2009年共刊出论文1358篇,共695篇被引2333次,篇均被引次数为3.36次.被引文章作者分布在我国的26个省、市、自治区以及我国香港、澳门,还有两篇被引文献的作者来自美国,其中北京、上海、广东、山东居前列,分别有202、93、82、69篇文章被引用.按被引文章作者单位划分,中山大学中山眼科中心被引频次(349次)排第一,首都医科大学北京同仁医院同仁眼科中心位居第二(265次).除本刊自引外,还被国际眼科杂志、眼科、中国实用眼科杂志等300多种期刊所引用.结论中华眼科杂志所载论文质量和被引率均较高,在我国眼科学研究领域具有较强的影响力.     

《中国实用眼科杂志》刊发论文的被引分析

目的从文献引证的角度透视《中国实用眼科杂志》的学术水平和期刊质量。方法依据《中国生物医学期刊引文数据库》(ChineseMedicalCitationIndex,CMCI),采用文献计量方法对《中国实用眼科杂志》载文被CMCI来源期刊引用的情况进行统计分析及评价。结果2001～2004年平均发文被引比例为41.64%。单篇论文最高被引66次,平均被引2.37次;单篇被引4次以上论文143篇,共被引933次,占总被引篇数的16.55%,占被引总频次的45.65%。864篇被引论文中,共有国内外作者728人,作者最高被引篇数为5篇,被引1篇的作者614人,占作者总数的84.34%。有340种期刊引用《中国实用眼科杂志》,自引率为0.0846。结论《中国实用眼科杂志》所载文献质量较高,形成具有独立风格和特色且相对稳定的研究体系。该刊不仅是我国眼科学研究领域最重要的信息源之一,也是我国医学领域的主要核心期刊。     

2001年中文眼科学期刊引文分析

目的分析中文眼科学专业期刊所载论文的引文和论文被他刊引用情况,了解眼科学领域文献的利用与需求特征。方法以2001年公开发表的13种中文眼科学专业期刊为研究对象,采用引文计量学方法对所载论文的引文数量、类型、语种、自引率及他引率等进行统计分析,同时对其中5种眼科学核心期刊从引文年限分布、普赖斯指数及引文半衰期、论文被引情况等方面进行分析。结果2001年13种眼科学专业期刊引文总量为16429条,篇均引文量5．13条,平均引文率77．42％,自引率23．49％、他引率76．51％;引文语种以英文为主（59．17％）,主要的引文类型为期刊（89．25％）。2001年5种眼科学核心期刊论文中,中、外文文献分别在出版后第3、4年引用频次最高,引文的总普赖斯指数为35．22％,中、外文引文文献半衰期分别为5．12年及7．52年。结论中文眼科学专业期刊引文主要来自英文期刊,中文文献引用半衰期较短,眼科学核心期刊被引率高。（中华眼科杂志．2006,42：443-447）     

《中国斜视与小儿眼科杂志》载文被引分析研究

目的从文献引证的角度了解《中国斜视与小儿眼科杂志》的学术水平和期刊质量。方法依据中国生物医学期刊引文数据库(CMCI),采用文献计量学方法对《中国斜视与小儿眼科杂志》载文被CMCI来源期刊引用的情况进行统计、分析及评价。结果载文被引1261次,单篇论文平均被引次数为2.97次,被引作者群的地域分布29个省、市和自治区,北京、山东、广东等地区居于前列,有214种期刊引用该刊。结论该刊是我国斜视与小儿眼科医学研究领域重要的信息源之一,是我国眼科学研究领域的主要期刊。     

中华眼科杂志2001至2006年作者发表论文及其被引情况分析

目的从文献引证角度透视中华眼科杂志的作者发表论文和被引情况。方法依据《中国生物医学期刊引文数据库》（CMCI）,采用文献计量方法对中华眼科杂志作者发表论文和被引情况进行统计分析及评价。结果中华眼科杂志2001至2006年间,共有990名第一著者发表论文1513篇,其中来自479人的705篇论文被引用2611次。发表1篇论文的作者有748人,占第一作者人数的75．6％,发表4篇以上的核心作者50人,发表论文325篇（21．5％）。按作者地区划分,北京地区发表论文412篇（27．2％）,被引666次,居首;广东地区发表论文235篇（15．5％）被引632次,居第二位。按作者单位划分,17个论文多产单位发表论文851篇（55．6％）,被引1611次（61．7％）;其中中山大学中山眼科中心发表论文198篇,被引526次,居机构排名首位;首都医科大学北京同仁眼科中心发表论文140篇,被引237次,居第二位。结论中华眼科杂志所载文献被引用比例较高,拥有一支实力雄厚、对刊物影响力较大、学术造诣较深的活跃核心作者队伍,作者群地区分布范围广,发表论文较多的地区是北京、广东、上海。     

《中华眼科杂志》载文被引用情况统计分析

目的：从文献引证的角度透视《中华眼科杂志》的学术水平和期刊质量。方法：依据《中国科技论文统计与引文分析数据库》（Chinese science and technology papers and citation database,CSTPC）,采用文献计量方法对《中华眼科杂志》载文被CSTPC来源期刊引用的情况进行统计分析及评价。结果：《中华眼科杂志》所载文献质量较高,作者群的地域分布范围较广,已形成具有独立风格和特色且相对稳定的研究体系。结论：《中华眼科杂志》不仅是我国眼科学研究领域最重要的信息资源之一,也是我国主要的医学核心期刊。     

三种眼科学期刊引文分析

目的探讨中、美、英三国主办的三种眼科学期刊引文的引用规律及情报吸收能力。方法采用引文计量分析法统计American Journal of Ophthalmology（AJO）、British Journal of Ophthalmology（BJO）与中华眼科杂志（CJO）2005年刊载的论文所引用的参考文献,从引文数量、引文年代、普赖斯指数、自引率、高被引期刊等多方面进行比较分析。结果AJ0、BJO及CJO篇均引文数量分别为12．67、21．31及11．50,AJO、BJO及CJO的普赖斯指数分别为37．12％、33．47％及44．42％,自引率分别为13．39％、7．54％及9．89％,AJO、BJO及CJO分别引用了1140、1487及724种期刊,前13种期刊总被引频次占全部引文的58．82％、49．51％及46．39％。结论AJO、BJO及CJO各自具有不同的特点。BJO篇均引文数较高,涉猎文献范围广,自引率较低,引用文献半衰期较长;AJO引用期刊相对集中,自引率相对较高;CJO引用文献较新,普赖斯指数较高,自引率适中。     

中华眼科杂志2001至2004年引文分析

目的研究中华眼科杂志文献引用规律及我国眼科学研究领域科研人员的文献利用与需求特征。方法采用引文计量分析法,统计中华眼科杂志2001至2004年间刊载的926篇论文所引用的参考文献(引文)。结果926篇论文中,有引文的论文共850篇,引文率为91．79％,篇均引文8．05条;引文中期刊912种(91．97％),图书266种(7．85％);普赖斯指数35．50％;期刊自引626条,自引率8．40％。被引用频次居前17位的中、外文期刊的引文量占总引用期刊引文量的54．03％。结论中华眼科杂志涉猎文献范围广,引文类型以期刊为主,语种以英文文献为多,引文的外文语种结构较为单一,研究引用文献比较滞后,文献半衰期较长,专业人员利用近5年内新文献的能力有待于进一步提高。     

中华眼科杂志2000至2009年刊出论文的影响因子和被引频次分析

目的 从影响因子及文献引证角度研究中华眼科杂志的学术水平和影响力.方法 依据<中国科技期刊引证报告>(CJCR)提供的影响因子数据,并按照文献计量学的方法,利用<中国生物医学期刊引文数据库>(CMCI/CMCC整合版)的资料和数据,对中华眼科杂志载文被CMCI/CMCC来源期刊引用的情况进行统计分析和评价.结果 中华眼科杂志自2000年至2008年的影响因子分别为0.573、0.863、0.702、0.745、0.877、1.031、0.807、0.875、0.533.2000年至2009年近十年共刊出论文2485篇,被引用1562篇,总被引频次为9294次,总被引率为62.86%.按被引文章作者地区划分,广东、北京、山东和上海地区被引频次最高,分别为2661、2200、926、901次,而按被引文章作者单位划分,中山大学中山眼科中心发表论文(277篇)、被引篇数(201篇)和被引频次(2193次)以及首都医科大学北京同仁眼科中心发表论文(197篇)、被引篇数(106篇)和被引频次(507次)位居前列.结论 中华眼科杂志的影响因子较稳定,并位居国内眼科杂志之首,同时载文被引频次较高,证明了该期刊是我国眼科学研究领域的主要核心期刊,有着高水平的论文质量和较强的影响力.

Abstract：

Objective From the point of impact factor and citation to evaluate the academic level and influence of Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology ( CJO). Methods Using the impact factor (IF) data provided by China Science and Technology Journal Citation Reports ( CJCR),and the information of Chinese Medical citation Index (CMCI/CMCC integrated version),the citations from C JO were collected and analyzed with bibliometric methods. Result From 2000 to 2008,the IF of CJO were 0. 573,0. 863,0. 702,0. 745,0. 877,1. 031,0. 807,0. 875 and 0. 533. From 2000 to 2009,2485 papers were published in CJO,1562 of them were referenced (9294 times). The frequency of total citation rate was 62. 86%. The region with the highest citation frequency was Guangdong ( 2661 times),followed by Beijing ( 2200 times),Shandong (926 times) and Shanghai(901 times). As to the institution,the top of rank was Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center of Sun Yat-Sen University (with 277 papers,201 citations and 2193 times of citation frequency) and Beijing Tongren Eye Center ( with 197 papers,106 citations and 507 times of citation frequency). Conclusion The IF of CJO was stable,and ranked first in domestic academic of Ophthalmology. Meanwhile,it had a higher frequency of Citation,which shows that CJO has high quality and strong influence,and become one of main core ophthalmology journals in China.     

我国眼科学术期刊学术水平与影响力分析

目的 进一步了解我国眼科学术期刊的整体水平和影响力.方法 采用文献计量学方法,依据2002至2007年版<中国学术期刊综合引证报告>(CAJCCR)的数据及<中国引文数据库>2001至2007年的数据,统计我国13种眼科杂志的影响因子(IF)、他引IF、总被引频次、被引文章篇数、即年指标、基金论文比、Web即年下载率、h指数均值,并计算出他引被引率、h2/n、高被引论文比均值等指标.同时统计分析它们被国内外重要核心期刊数据库收录情况.结果 13种眼科学术期刊2001至2006年IF均值、被引频次均值分别为0.3940和557,高于D辑(医药卫生类期刊)每刊平均值.IF、他引IF、总被引频次、他引被引率、即年指标、基金论文比、Web即年下载率、h指数、h2/n、高被引论文比等10种指标中5项指标以上进入前5位并被5种以上国内外重要数据库收录的期刊有:<中华眼科杂志>、<中华眼底病杂志>、<中国实用眼科杂志>、<眼视光学杂志>.<中华眼科杂志>大部分指标名列第一.结论 我国13种眼科学术期刊主要计量指标最高值与最低值相差悬殊,表明部分眼科学术类期刊质量有待提高.     

我国眼科学科技核心期刊2010-2014年主要学术指标对比研究

目的 探究我国眼科学科技核心期刊2010-2014年学术影响力的发展趋势。设计 回顾性资料分析。研究对象 我国眼科学科技核心期刊。方法 以2011-2015年中国科技引证报告（核心版）收录的眼科学科技核心期刊的主要学术指标为来源数据,比较我国眼科学科技核心期刊的总被引频次、影响因子、他引率、基金论文比和综合评价总分等指标。主要指标 期刊总被引频次、影响因子、他引率、基金论文比、综合评价总分。结果 2010-2014年,《中华眼科杂志》历年总被引频次均位居所有中国眼科学科技核心期刊首位,分别为2318、2584、2717、2616、2278;《国际眼科杂志》发文总量12 336篇位居第二位,近年来各项指标提升快;5年影响因子平均值位居前5位的分别是《中华眼科杂志》、《中华眼底病杂志》、《眼科新进展》、《中国斜视与小儿眼科杂志》、《眼科》,且其综合评价总分也相对较高,平均值分别为79.58、41.28、45.20、26.24、38.88。结论 我国眼科学科技核心期刊主要学术指标差异明显,但各自仍有上升空间。（眼科, 2016, 25： 413－417）     

Citation patterns in the optometric and ophthalmologic clinical binocular vision literature.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare citation patterns in the clinical binocular vision literature of optometry and ophthalmology. METHODS: The author conducted citation analysis of two current clinical binocular vision textbooks from optometry and two from ophthalmology and of articles published in the years 2000 to 2004 in optometry and ophthalmology journals. Topical parameters for inclusion of sources were diagnosis and management of nonstrabismic binocular vision disorders, diagnosis and management of nonpresbyopic ocular accommodation disorders, and procedures for examining such conditions. These topical parameters were chosen because they are areas in which the diagnostic procedures and treatment options available to members of the two professions are not delineated by their respective scopes of practice. RESULTS: The most frequently cited journals in the optometric publications were optometry journals (63% of citations in the optometry textbooks and 58% in the optometry journal articles). The most frequently cited journals in the ophthalmology publications were ophthalmology journals (79% of citations in the ophthalmology textbooks and 49% in the ophthalmology journal articles). Each discipline also cited a greater variety of journals from within its own field than was cited by the other discipline. The journal with the highest total number of citations was Optometry and Vision Science (280) followed by Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics (73), American Journal of Ophthalmology (68), Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (62), and Optometry (61). CONCLUSIONS: Optometry and ophthalmology sources show more citations to materials from their own discipline than from their fellow discipline in the area of nonstrabismic binocular vision disorders and nonpresbyopic accommodative disorders. Reasons may include lack of awareness of the literature of the other discipline, bias toward the literature of one's own discipline, or bias against the literature of another discipline. It is also likely that the diagnostic and management strategies of the two professions are significantly different, although scope of practice would not constrain the range of strategies for the conditions chosen as the topical matter for consideration in this study. The journals found to be most frequently cited in this study should help to identify the core journals in this area of clinical binocular vision.     

Citation analysis of the most influential authors and ophthalmology journals in the field of cataract and corneal refractive surgery 2000-2004

Purpose: To identify the most published authors on the topics of ‘cataract’ and ‘LASIK’, the journals in which they publish, and the citation patterns of the most‐cited articles by these authors over a 5‐year publication period. Methods: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI) was used to identify the 30 most‐published authors in ‘cataract’ and ‘laser in situ keratomileusis’ (LASIK) (2000–2004 inclusive). SCI was subsequently used to analyse the recorded articles for each author in terms of source journal, the most commonly cited articles and citation source. Results: Of the 30 most‐published authors in the fields of cataract and LASIK, the USA was the most well‐represented source country, accounting for 33%; 20% were from Australia, and 17% from Austria. Germany and Japan each contributed 7%. Eighty per cent of the publications produced by these 30 authors (2000–2004) were in 10 journals, of which the Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (JCRS) published more than one‐third. Of the three most‐cited articles for each author, the greatest number were published in JCRS (35.6%). The citation count of the articles had a weak correlation to the journal impact factor of the source journal; however, the self‐citation rate of these articles did not. Conclusions: The USA and Australia together were the source of more than half of the most‐published authors on cataract and LASIK and the majority of articles published by the 30 most prolific authors were published in only 10 journals. The impact factors of the publication journals preferred by these authors are influenced by the article citation counts, not vice versa.     

Citation analysis and journal impact factors in ophthalmology and vision science journals

Citation analysis has evolved over the last 50 years as one parameter for assessing the quality of research published in scientific, technology and social science journals. This is based on the assumption that influential research is widely cited by other scientists and clinicians. With the advent of the Internet, Journal Citation Reports from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI-JCR) have become widely available to individuals and institutions. In an increasingly competitive research environ-ment, aspects of citation analysis have been suggested as simple proxy, objective measures to evaluate the research quality of a journal, published articles, research institutions and even individual researchers. This review article provides an overview of citation analysis, including definitions, uses of these reports, and related controversies and potential abuses. As it has become the most commonly used indicator, there is a particular focus on the use of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF). This is a widely quoted measure indicating the frequency with which the average article published in a journal of interest will be quoted within a specified time frame that therefore allows approximate comparisons of journals within a particular field of interest. Given the relative paucity of information in this area, emphasis is placed on citation analysis within ophthalmology, in particular in regard to the 43 ophthal-mology, vision science and optometry journals that are listed in the ISI-JCR 2001 reports.