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.     

Trends in ophthalmology journals: a five-year bibliometric analysis (2009-2013)

AIM: To explore the trends in the ophthalmic literature over a 5-year period in relation to country, research expenditure and demographics. METHODS: Articles published between 2009 and 2013 by the 20highest-contributing countries in the 20 top-ranked ophthalmology journals were identified by their country of affiliation. The number of articles published and mean impact factor were measured per country for each year and trends explored using regression analysis with 5-year and 10-year forecasts calculated. Data on research expenditure was collected and tested for correlation with the number of articles and mean impact factor. RESULTS: The analysis included 19 338 articles. The USA, UK and Europe accounted for 60.2% of articles published, with the USA contributing 7388 articles (34.0%). The USA also demonstrated the highest mean impact factor (3.5). Research expenditure was significantly correlated with both research output (r=0.86, P<0.001) and scholarly impact (r=0.42, P<0.001). China (P<0.01), Korea (P<0.01) and India (P<0.02) demonstrated a significant growth in research output over the study period. The research contribution of these three countries combined is forecasted to overtake that of Europe within ten years, with China expected to be the second-largest contributor within five years. These countries were also among those demonstrating the greatest growth in research expenditure. CONCLUSION: While the USA and European countries are major contributors of ophthalmic research, the productivity of some Asian countries is growing impressively. The contribution of China, Korea and India is forecasted to outweigh that of Europe by 2023. Research expenditure is highly correlated with research productivity and these trends reflect the differing economic priorities across the world.     

近10a中国作者发表在眼科SCI期刊的文章情况调查

自"视觉2020"行动发起已有10a余.尽管中国的文章总量在20强国家中排第五位,但各地区的文章分布尚不清楚.本文比较来自中国三个主要地区:大陆、香港和台湾在这10a内发表在国际期刊上的眼科文章情况.检索2000/2009年的PubMed数据库,分别对文章的数量,影响因子(IF)和顶级杂志发表文章数量进行比较.从2000/2009年,中国发表共计 2 493篇眼科相关文章,其中大陆1 076篇,台湾784篇,香港633篇.三个地区发表的文章数量随时间推移有所增加(从99到491).自2006年开始,大陆发表的文章总数超过了香港及台湾.大陆累计影响因子2 565.108分,高于台湾(1 794.049)和香港(1 544.021),但香港在平均影响因子分值方面最高.通过研究发现,近10a来大陆在SCI期刊发表文章的数量有很大的飞跃,并缩小了与台湾和香港之间的差距.     

国内学者眼科领域系统评价和Meta分析在SCI期刊的发表情况

目的 统计分析目前国内学者在SCI期刊发表的眼科领域系统评价和Meta分析论文情况,为今后发表此类研究提供参考。设计 描述性研究。研究对象 在PubMed、EMBASE及Cochrane library三大数据库中收录的所有眼科领域的系统评价和Meta分析论文。方法 系统检索PubMed、EMBASE及Cochrane library三大数据库。检索时,限定研究对象为人类,语言为英语,检索时间截止到2017年1月30日。通过阅读标题、摘要及全文,排除重复及不相关研究,将最终符合条件的研究按作者来源、发表年限、疾病类型等进行归类分析。主要指标 作者来源、发表年限、疾病类型。 结果 三大数据库共检索到10 551条题录（PubMed 4214,EMBASE 6155,Cochrane library 182）。排除重复及不相关研究后,最终符合条件的系统评价和Meta分析442篇。此类研究最早发表于2004年,按年发表量排名,前三名分别是：2015（100篇,22.62%）、2014（91篇,20.59%）、2016（90篇,20.36%）。共有来自52个城市的作者参与发表过此类研究,前三名城市分别是：上海（95篇,21.49%）、北京（45篇,10.18%）、广州（38篇,8.60%）。共有126种杂志发表此类研究,前三名杂志分别是：PLoS One (79篇,17.87%)、Molecular Vision（16篇,3.62%）、BMC Ophthalmology（15篇,3.39%）。研究内容以视网膜疾病最多,前三名疾病分别是：视网膜疾病（168篇,38.01%）、青光眼（95篇,21.49%）、屈光手术（47篇,10.63%）。定性系统评价17篇（3.85%）,Meta分析425篇（96.15%）。在Meta分析中干预性研究177篇,观察性研究248篇,后者以基因相关研究（137篇）、危险因素（84篇）为主。结论 国内学者在眼科领域系统评价发表量逐年增多,作者主要集中于国内大城市,尤其是上海和北京,研究热点主要是视网膜疾病、青光眼,非干预性研究发表量已超越干预性研究,其中以基因相关研究及危险因素研究为主。     

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.     

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）     

Analysis of New Zealand's research productivity in ophthalmology and vision science: 1993-2002

AIM: To assess New Zealand's research productivity in the area of ophthalmology and vision science over the decade 1993-2002. METHODS: New Zealand-based researchers involved in ophthalmology or vision science research, including ophthalmologists, optometrists and vision scientists were identified via professional colleges, universities and electronic databases. Peer-reviewed publications by these authors were identified by both searching electronic databases (MEDLINE/Pubmed) and personal communication with individual researchers. RESULTS: Eighty-five New Zealand-based researchers involved in ophthalmology or vision science research published 446 articles in 84 scientific journals during the 10-year period. The cohort consisted of 59 ophthalmologists and 26 other researchers based in a diverse range of ophthalmology, optometry and university departments. Significant collaboration was observed between groups within New Zealand and with international institutions. Comparing ophthalmologists and 'other' researchers, ophthalmologists produced 69% of all ophthalmology and vision science research publications and those classified as 'active ophthalmologist researchers' published an average of 11 (range 5-55) papers each during this decade, compared to eight (range 5-25) for the group 'other active researchers'. This was also reflected in the high productivity rate by ophthalmologists of 277 publications per 1000. Publications were identified in a wide range of journals with the majority in top 20-ranked ophthalmology journals. The trend over the decade highlighted an increase in number of scientific publications, from 43 per annum in 1993, to 68 per annum in 2002. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a relatively small and geographically isolated population, New Zealand ophthalmology and vision science research is highly active and collaborative, with significantly increased research productivity during the period 1993-2002. The present study is the first to document these trends and provides strong evidence to justify continued support for ophthalmology and vision science research in New Zealand.     

Performance in the Duke-Elder ophthalmology undergraduate prize examination and future careers in ophthalmology

Aims

Cognitive factors (eg, academic achievement) have had a significant role in selecting postgraduate surgical trainees in the past. This project sought to determine the role of a national undergraduate ophthalmology prize examination (Duke–Elder examination) in the selection of postgraduate ophthalmology trainees. This would also serve as a quality assurance exercise for the assessment, in which the ultimate aim is to encourage trainees into ophthalmology.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the top 20 ranked candidates in the Duke–Elder examination from 1989 to 2005 (except 1995) was carried out to determine which of them subsequently entered the ophthalmic training and General Medical Council Specialist Registers.

Results

Out of the top 20 candidates in the exam, 29.5% went into specialist training in ophthalmology. Some appeared in the top 20 more than once, with 56% of them going into ophthalmic training, but they had a similar median time to enter training as those who appeared in the top 20 once. There was no significant evidence to suggest that the overall median ranking scores between the UK medical schools differed (P=0.23; Kruskal–Wallis test). However, there was a marked difference in frequency of top 20 candidates from each medical school, which could not be explained by the size of the medical school alone.

Conclusion

It is difficult to conclude from these findings the importance that the Duke–Elder examination has in the selection of trainees into ophthalmology. The role of cognitive factors in selection into postgraduate medical/surgical training is discussed, along with the potential academic criteria, which may influence interview scores.     

An observational study of the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference, 2000 and subsequent publication in indexed journals

AIMS: To determine the quality of reporting in the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference (AIOC) 2000, subsequent rate of publication in an indexed journal and differences between the proceedings and the journal version of these papers. DESIGN: Observational study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All papers presented at the AIOC 2000 were retrieved from the proceedings and assessed for completeness of reporting. To determine the subsequent full publication, a Medline search was performed as of January 2007; consistency between the proceedings paper and the final publication was evaluated. Statistical analysis: Chi square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare publication rates based on geographical location, subspecialty and study design; Student's t -test was used to compare differences based on the number of authors and sample size. RESULTS: Two hundred papers were retrieved; many failed to include study dates, design or statistical methods employed. Thirty-three (16.5%) papers were subsequently published in indexed journals by January 2007. The published version differed from the proceedings paper in 27 (81.8%) instances, mostly relating to changes in author name, number or sequence. CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of reporting of scientific papers in the proceedings of the AIOC 2000 was inadequate and many did not result in publication in an indexed journal. Differences between the published paper in journals and in proceedings were seen in several instances. Ophthalmologists should be cautious about using the information provided in conference proceedings in their ophthalmic practice.     

内窥镜在眼科的应用现状和发展

近20年来医用内窥镜技术发展迅速,目前应用于眼科手术治疗的内窥镜主要有应用于眼球内手术的眼内窥镜、应用于泪道手术的泪道内窥镜以及应用于视神经管减压术、泪囊鼻腔吻合术的鼻内窥镜.内窥镜手术已成为眼科手术的一个新的发展和重要补充.本文就内窥镜在眼科应用的历史、眼内窥镜类型和工作原理、手术入路以及内窥镜在眼科手术中应用的适应证、疗效和并发症作一综述.     

以问题为基础的学习与模拟标准化患者相结合在眼科学基础教学中的探究

目的：探讨以问题为基础的学习( problem-based learning , PBL)结合标准化患者( standardized patient,SP)在眼科学基础教学中的应用效果。
　　方法：选取2012级眼视光专业学生64人为研究对象,随机抽取32人为试验组,采用PBL 结合标准化患者进行眼科学基础教学,其余32人为对照组,采用传统教学方法。授课结束后应用自制调查问卷调查学生对教学效果的评价。统计两组学生的考试成绩及问卷调查结果。计数资料采取χ2检验,计量资料采用均数±标准差( x-±s)表示,行独立样本 t 检验,以 P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。
　　结果：试验组理论考试成绩(83.22±3.75)和试验考试成绩(94.28±2.20)均明显高于对照组理论考试成绩(70.72±3.95)和试验考试成绩(85.44±3.52),差异有统计学意义(P均<0.01)。试验组在实习考核中问诊及病史采集、眼科检查、临床诊断和病历书写的成绩均值均高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.01)。试验组学生对SP 与PBL结合教学在调动学习积极性、加强团队协作意识、提高语言表达能力、综合分析能力、自学能力、创新能力、总结归纳能力、实践操作能力,以及加强知识结构系统化方面的效果评价明显高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。
　　结论：眼科学基础教学中将SP与PBL相结合,有助于学生更好地掌握专业知识,能调动学习积极性,提高自学能力、实践操作能力和临床思维能力。     

骨髓间充质干细胞及其在眼科应用的研究进展

骨髓间充质干细胞作为一类成体干细胞,由于具有易被分离、易被外源基因转染且稳定表达,分裂增殖能力强、以及体外操作简便等特点,成为组织工程、细胞移植及基因治疗理想的靶细胞。我们就骨髓间充质干细胞的概念、各项生理特征、向各组织的分化潜能及在眼科的应用等方面进行综述,并展望骨髓间充质干细胞的应用前景。     

Impact of accreditation on documentation and staff perception in the ophthalmology department of an Indian medical college

Purpose:National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers operates the health-care accreditation program in India. Research on impact of accreditation on eye-care centers is scarce. This article was conceptualized to scientifically evaluate the changes in documentation brought about by accreditation and its effects on staff in the Ophthalmology Department of an Indian Medical College.Methods:This was conducted as a quasi-experimental study in four steps. First, a point-based evaluation of case sheets in both pre-accreditation and postaccreditation phase, along with statistical analysis of the results, was done. Step two involved analysis of quality indicators and patient safety indices in successive years from inception of data to post-accreditation phase. Step three comprised a survey of staff employing a validated tool, and finally, face-to-face semistructured interviews with designated authorities, including finance departmental head, completed the study.Results:A statistically significant difference was seen in scores achieved by the pre and postaccreditation case sheets, with the postphase case sheets achieving 15% increased scores over the prephase case sheets. Quality indicator indices displayed improvements post-accreditation. There was an accompanying increase in quantity of documentation. Financial data analysis showed increased expenditure for accreditation under multiple heads. Staff believed that accreditation led to increased workload but did not express decreased satisfaction and felt that accreditation was eventually beneficial. However, staff believed rewards for improving quality can be enhanced.Conclusion:Accreditation increases quality and quantity of documentation, and staff workload. Increased financial costs also ensue.Staff believe that accreditation improves quality, is beneficial, but desire enhanced rewards.     

眼科学PBL教学模式可行性调查与分析

目的:探讨我国高等医学院校眼科学教学引入PBL教学模式的可行性。方法:以问卷形式对157名处于临床实习阶段的长江大学2009级临床医学专业学生进行调查,然后对调查结果进行分析。结果:调查显示,尽管77.9%的学生对目前眼科学传统教学模式的教学效果比较满意,但仍有82.8%的学生赞成眼科学课堂引入PBL教学模式;如果在传统教学模式与PBL教学模式两者间做选择,则有83.4%的学生愿意选择PBL教学模式;56.6%的学生认为PBL教学模式有利于培养学生的自学能力。虽然主客观条件为眼科学引入PBL教学提供了可行性,但PBL教学模式也存在不足,73.1%的学生认为学校教学设施还不够,78.6%的学生认为只有部分眼科学内容适合采用PBL教学模式教学。结论:PBL教学模式值得在眼科学教学中进行改革与探索,以创建适合我国国情的眼科学教学模式。     

Teaching of ophthalmology in undergraduate curricula: a survey of Australasian and Asian medical schools

BACKGROUND: Despite established international guidelines on preferred teaching components for ophthalmology in undergraduate curricula, with increasingly less specialty-based undergraduate teaching within curricula, teaching of core ophthalmology knowledge and skills may become marginalized. This survey aims to evaluate the current state of undergraduate ophthalmology teaching in Australasia and proximate Asian medical schools. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed to determine the content and extent of ophthalmology teaching in the undergraduate medical curriculum. The questionnaire was sent to 25 medical schools throughout Australasia and Asia. RESULTS: Nineteen of the 25 questionnaires were returned (76% response rate). Ophthalmology teaching programmes ranged from 2 to 20 days: five (26%) medical schools having one ophthalmology attachment; six schools (32%) two attachments; and the remainder three or more. Only seven of the schools taught all 13 ophthalmology topics recommended in current curriculum guidelines. Ocular examination (100%), lens and cataract (95%) and ocular manifestations of systemic disease (95%) were the most commonly taught topics, with intraocular tumours only covered by 10 schools (53%). Students in 14 schools (74%) attended ophthalmology operating theatre, but only two schools (11%) offered attendance at optometry clinics. Ten schools (53%) required a pass in ophthalmology to complete the academic year. CONCLUSION: Ophthalmology may increasingly be a small, or even absent, component of undergraduate medical curricula. Despite established international ophthalmology curriculum guidelines, this survey highlights significant lack of uniformity in their implementation.     

广谱高效的新氟喹诺酮类抗菌药莫西沙星及其在眼科的应用

莫西沙星是一种广谱、高效的新型氟喹诺酮类抗菌药物,在眼科领域的研究应用正在蓬勃开展,对莫西沙星的抗菌活性、眼内通透性、眼科实验治疗研究、滴眼液的临床疗效和安全性研究的最新进展作一综述。     

浅谈电子病历系统对眼科临床教学的利弊

电子病历具有书写方便、保存时间长、节省资源、资料完整、易检索、可以实现资源共享等优势。它在眼科临床教学中提高了实习医师的工作效率,为教学提供了更多的临床资源。但同时它也带来了一些新的问题,比如病历质量下降,学生思维局限,临床医师带教意识减弱。针对这些利弊,我们结合眼科的临床特点,改进目前的临床教学思路与方法,从多方面正确引导学生发挥电子病历的优势,克服其局限性,提高眼科临床教学质量。（眼科, 2014, 23： 137-139）     

Management of ophthalmology referral letters in the United Kingdom: are traditional methods the best?

BACKGROUND: Traditionally referrals to ophthalmic units have been read and prioritised by a senior ophthalmologist. This has been seen as necessary due to the complex nature of the information contained within the referral, and to ensure that patients with sight threatening conditions are seen with appropriate speed. This well-established system is in the process of being challenged with the introduction of electronic booking in England (Choose and Book). This study undertook to establish whether non-consultant ophthalmic practitioners working in an eye clinic could grade referrals with an efficacy priority rating compatible with that of a consultant ophthalmologist. METHOD: A total of 138 ophthalmic referral letters were read and prioritised using a 4 point scale by the consultant to whom they were addressed. They were then prioritised by three test readers, without knowledge of the consultant's decision. Agreement was evaluated using unweighted and linear weighted kappa analysis. A selection of the more controversial referrals (i.e. where agreement was equivocal) were also prioritised by four consultants. RESULTS: Weighted kappa analysis showed only a fair agreement between the scores given by the three test readers [Senior House Officer (SHO), Optometrist and Nurse Practitioner] and the consultant of 0.45, 0.48 and 0.37, respectively. However, in all cases, over 90% of scores were within one point of agreement with the Consultant score. Some letters were particularly difficult to interpret, leading to poor inter-consultant agreement on the more controversial letters (kappa = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Agreed clinical guidelines would make the prioritisation of most referral letters straightforward by a trained ophthalmic practitioner. However, traditional methods are inherently variable. To assist the untrained prioritiser there may need to be a priority scoring system, or availability of a triage assessment clinic.     

Current state and future prospects of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology: a review

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a major frontier in computer science research. Although AI has broad application across many medical fields, it will have particular utility in ophthalmology and will dramatically change the diagnostic and treatment pathways for many eye conditions such as corneal ectasias, glaucoma, age‐related macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy. However, given that AI has primarily been driven as a computer science, its concepts and terminology are unfamiliar to many medical professionals. Important key terms such as machine learning and deep learning are often misunderstood and incorrectly used interchangeably. This article presents an overview of AI and new developments relevant to ophthalmology.