Scholarly Output Graph: A Graphical Article-Level Metric Indicating the Impact of a Scholar’s Publications

PurposeWhereas traditional book and journal publishing remain the gold standard for many post-secondary institutions, nontraditional publishing is just as prolific at the flagship university in Maine. The university has strong land and sea grant missions that drive a broad research agenda, with an emphasis on community outreach and engagement. However, the impact of researchers’ contributions outside of academe is unlikely to be accurately reflected in promotion, tenure or review processes. Thus, the authors designed a series of altmetrics workshops aimed at seeding conversations around novel ways to track the impact of researchers’ diverse scholarly and creative outputs. Design/methodology/approachThis paper presents a case study of the instructional approach taken at the University of Maine library to facilitate discussions of alternative impact assessments that reach beyond traditional publications. FindingsEvaluations revealed an increased awareness of, and interest in, impact tracking tools that capture both traditional scholarship, like journal articles, and nontraditional scholarly and creative outputs, such as videos, podcasts and newsletters. The authors learned that altmetrics provides an entry point into a broader conversation about scholarly impact, and was best received by those whose scholarly output is not always captured by traditional metrics. Practical implications Scholars are equipped with novel methods for describing the value of their work and discovering a broader audience for their research. Future initiatives will target the needs identified through initial conversations around altmetrics. Originality/valueAltmetrics workshops provide spaces to explore the potential for new tools that capture a range of previously unconsidered measures of impact, and to discuss the implications of those measures.

Download Full-text

Systematic review and bibliometric analysis of African anesthesia and critical care medicine research Part II: A scientometric analysis of the 116 most cited articles

10.21203/rs.3.rs-41787/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye ◽

Joel Noutakdie Tochie ◽

Aime Mbonda ◽

Cynthia Wafo Solam ◽

Leonid Daya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Critical Care ◽

Web Of Science ◽

Descriptive Analysis ◽

World Journal ◽

Critical Care Medicine ◽

Scientometric Analysis ◽

African Countries ◽

Medicine Research ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

The Impact

Abstract BackgroundScientometrics is used to assess the impact of research in several health fields, including Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine. The purpose of this study was to define the landscape and key players of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine research in Africa.MethodsThe authors searched Web of Science from inception to May 4, 2020, for articles on and about Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine in Africa with ≥ 2 citations. Quantitative (H-index) and qualitative (descriptive analysis of yearly publications and interpretation of document, co-authorship, author country, and keyword) bibliometric analyses were done.ResultsThe search strategy returned 116 articles that had a median of 5 (IQR: 3-12) citations on Web of Science. The most frequent journals were Anesthesia and Analgesia (18, 15.5%), World Journal of Surgery (13, 11.2%), and South African Medical Journal (8, 6.9%). Most (74, 63.8%) articles were published on or after 2013, and seven authors had more than 1 article in the top 116 articles: Epiu I (3, 2.6%), Elobu AE (2, 1.7%), Fenton PM (2, 1.7%), Kibwana S (2, 1.7%), Rukewe A (2, 1.7%), Sama HD (2, 1.7%), and Zoumenou E (2, 1.7%). The bibliometric coupling analysis of documents highlighted 10 clusters with the most significant nodes being Biccard BM, 2018; Baker T, 2013; Llewellyn RL, 2009; Nigussie S, 2014; and Aziato L, 2015. Dubowitz G (5) and Ozgediz D (4) had the highest H-indices among the authors referenced by the most-cited African Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine articles. The U.S.A. had the largest global node, while South Africa and Uganda had the largest African nodes. The most prominent keywords were anesthesia, mortality, and surgery. ConclusionThis study highlighted a decline in the number of top-cited African articles and the roles of the U.S.A, Southern African, and East African countries in scholarly output. Future studies should focus on understanding the time trends of the publications.

Download Full-text

The Impact of Open-Access Status on Journal Indices: Respiratory and Pulmonology Journals

Current Respiratory Medicine Reviews ◽

10.2174/1573398x15666190214154531 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 26-31

Author(s):

Saif Aldeen AlRyalat ◽

Anas Abu Nassar ◽

Faris Tamimi ◽

Esraa Al-Fraihat ◽

Lama Assaf ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Variable Intensity ◽

Data Repositories ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

Open Access Journals ◽

Almost All ◽

The Impact

Background: Open access (OA) publishing is rapidly emerging in almost all disciplines, with variable intensity and effect on the discipline itself. The move toward OA is also observed in the field of respiratory and pulmonology, where both OA data repositories and OA journals are rapidly emerging. Objective: we aim to study the open-access status of respiratory and pulmonology journals and the impact of the open-access status on journal indices. Methods: We collected journal’s data from Scopus Source List on 1st of November 2018. We filtered the list for respiratory and pulmonology journals. Open Access Journals covered by Scopus are recognized as Open Access if the journal is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and/or the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources (ROAD). For each journal, we used several metrics to measure its strength, and then we compared these metrics between OA and non- OA journals. Results: There were 125 respiratory and pulmonology journals, a number that has increased by 12.6% since 2011. Moreover, the percentage of OA journals has increased from 21.6% to 26.4% during the same period. Non-OA journals have significantly higher scholarly output (p= 0.033), but OA journals have significantly higher percentage of citation (p= 0.05). Conclusion: Publishing in OA journals will yield a higher citation percentage compared to non-OA journals. Although this should not be the only reason to publish in an OA journal, it is still an important factor to decide where to publish.

Download Full-text

Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis of African Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine Research Part II: A Scientometric Analysis of the 116 Most Cited Articles

10.21203/rs.3.rs-41787/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye ◽

Joel Noutakdie Tochie ◽

Aime Mbonda ◽

Cynthia Wafo Solam ◽

Leonid Daya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Critical Care ◽

Web Of Science ◽

Descriptive Analysis ◽

World Journal ◽

Critical Care Medicine ◽

Scientometric Analysis ◽

African Countries ◽

Medicine Research ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background Scientometrics is used to assess the impact of research in several health fields, including Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine. The purpose of this study was to define the landscape and key players of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine research in Africa.Methods The authors searched Web of Science from inception to May 4, 2020, for articles on and about Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine in Africa with ≥ 2 citations. Quantitative (H-index) and qualitative (descriptive analysis of yearly publications and interpretation of document, co-authorship, author country, and keyword) bibliometric analyses were done.Results The search strategy returned 116 articles that had a median of 5 (IQR: 3-12) citations on Web of Science. The most frequent journals were Anesthesia and Analgesia (18, 15.5%), World Journal of Surgery (13, 11.2%), and South African Medical Journal (8, 6.9%). Most (74, 63.8%) articles were published on or after 2013, and seven authors had more than 1 article in the top 116 articles: Epiu I (3, 2.6%), Elobu AE (2, 1.7%), Fenton PM (2, 1.7%), Kibwana S (2, 1.7%), Rukewe A (2, 1.7%), Sama HD (2, 1.7%), and Zoumenou E (2, 1.7%). The bibliometric coupling analysis of documents highlighted 10 clusters with the most significant nodes being Biccard BM, 2018; Baker T, 2013; Llewellyn RL, 2009; Nigussie S, 2014; and Aziato L, 2015. Dubowitz G (5) and Ozgediz D (4) had the highest H-indices among the authors referenced by the most-cited African Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine articles. The U.S.A. had the largest global node, while South Africa and Uganda had the largest African nodes. The most prominent keywords were anesthesia, mortality, and surgery. Conclusion This study highlighted a decline in the number of top-cited African articles and the roles of the U.S.A, Southern African, and East African countries in scholarly output. Future studies should focus on understanding the time trends of the publications.

Download Full-text

One size does not fit all: the role of mentoring context in proactive individuals' scholarly impact

Career Development International ◽

10.1108/cdi-12-2020-0315 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Brenda E. Ghitulescu ◽

Shalini Khazanchi ◽

Zhi Tang ◽

Yang Yu

Keyword(s):

Structural Features ◽

Proactive Personality ◽

Gender Composition ◽

Mentoring Relationships ◽

Content Type ◽

Relationship Length ◽

Mentoring Relationship ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

Scholarly Impact ◽

The Impact

PurposeMentoring relationships have been proposed as a potential intervention to alleviate gender disparities in scholarly output. Yet, previous research has not provided a systematic understanding of the relationship between mentoring and scholarly output. The authors propose that individuals with a proactive personality are especially suited to leverage mentoring relationships to enhance scholarly outcomes. Structural features of mentoring relationships – gender composition, mentor supervisory status, and mentoring relationship length – provide cues that encourage the expression of proactive personality and result in higher scholarly impact.Design/methodology/approachData were collected via surveys from faculty members in a US university and were matched with objective scholarly impact data. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used for hypothesis testing.FindingsThe impact of proactive personality on scholarly impact was more positive for women protégés with women mentors than for all other mentor-protégé pairings. Results also showed support for two hypothesized three-way interactions with mentor status and mentoring relationship length.Originality/valueThis research provides insights into the contexts where mentorship makes the most difference in protégés' scholarly achievement. Gender composition of mentoring dyads and mentor status are important boundary conditions that impact the effect of proactive personality on scholarly output.

Download Full-text

Assessing Factors Associated With Altmetric Attention Score: A Preliminary Study of 3 Hand Surgery Journals

Hand ◽

10.1177/15589447211017220 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 155894472110172

Author(s):

David N. Bernstein ◽

Michelle A. Richardson ◽

Warren C. Hammert

Keyword(s):

Social Media ◽

Reference Group ◽

Linear Regression Analysis ◽

Hand Surgery ◽

Anatomical Location ◽

High Quality ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

Online Attention ◽

Number Of Citations ◽

The Impact

Background Traditional measures of evaluating scholarly output do not capture the impact social media can provide in disseminating and promoting research. We sought to better understand the level of online attention that high-quality hand research received. Methods Scientific manuscripts published from 2017 in Journal of Hand Surgery (American Volume) ( JHS-A), Journal of Hand Surgery ( European Volume) ( JHS-E), and HAND were recorded. Manuscript characteristics were determined, including the number of citations. Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a measure of a manuscript’s online attention and impact, was determined, as well as Twitter mentions, Facebook mentions, and news outlet mentions. Spearman rho (ρ) correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the relationship between the number of citations and AAS. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to determine which manuscript factors were associated with AAS. Results A total of 323 manuscripts were identified. There was a weak positive correlation between the number of citations and AAS; however, this relationship did not exist for each individual journal. Publication in HAND and JHS-E were associated with lower average manuscript AAS when using JHS-A as the reference group. Two additional factors were also associated with increased manuscript AAS: (1) being a clinical study focused on a specific upper extremity anatomical location; and (2) increasing number of institutions on a study. Conclusions Publication in HAND and JHS-E were associated with lower manuscript AAS when using JHS-A as the reference group, suggesting that HAND and JHS-E have room for improvement in using social media to share their high-quality hand surgery scientific articles.

Download Full-text

The impact of the open-access status on journal indices: a review of medical journals

F1000Research ◽

10.12688/f1000research.17979.1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 ◽

pp. 266 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Saif Aldeen AlRyalat ◽

Mohammad Saleh ◽

Mohammad Alaqraa ◽

Alaa Alfukaha ◽

Yara Alkayed ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Medical Journals ◽

The Past ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

The Difference ◽

Almost All ◽

Citation Metrics ◽

The Impact

Background: Over the past few decades, there has been an increase in the number of open access (OA) journals in almost all disciplines. This increase in OA journals was accompanied an increase in funding to support such movements. Medical fields are among the highest funded fields, which further promoted its journals to move toward OA publishing. Here, we aim to compare OA and non-OA journals in terms of citation metrics and other indices. Methods: We collected data on the included journals from Scopus Source List on 1st November 2018. We filtered the list for medical journals only. For each journal, we extracted data regarding citation metrics, scholarly output, and wither the journal is OA or non-OA. Results: On the 2017 Scopus list of journals, there was 5835 medical journals. Upon analyzing the difference between medical OA and non-OA journals, we found that OA journals had a significantly higher CiteScore (p< 0.001), percent cited (p< 0.001), and source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) (p< 0.001), whereas non-OA journals had higher scholarly output (p< 0.001). Among the five largest journal publishers, Springer Nature published the highest frequency of OA articles (31.5%), while Wiley-Blackwell had the lowest frequency among its medical journals (4.4%). Conclusion: Among medical journals, although non-OA journals still have higher output in terms of articles per year, OA journals have higher citation metrics.

Download Full-text

Measuring Research

10.1093/wentk/9780190640118.001.0001 ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Cassidy R. Sugimoto ◽

Vincent Larivière

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Research Evaluation ◽

Research Output ◽

Scholarly Communication ◽

Academic Disciplines ◽

Publish Or Perish ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

Emerging Issues ◽

The Many ◽

The Impact

Policy makers, academic administrators, scholars, and members of the public are clamoring for indicators of the value and reach of research. The question of how to quantify the impact and importance of research and scholarly output, from the publication of books and journal articles to the indexing of citations and tweets, is a critical one in predicting innovation, and in deciding what sorts of research is supported and whom is hired to carry it out. There is a wide set of data and tools available for measuring research, but they are often used in crude ways, and each have their own limitations and internal logics. Measuring Research: What Everyone Needs to Know® will provide, for the first time, an accessible account of the methods used to gather and analyze data on research output and impact. Following a brief history of scholarly communication and its measurement — from traditional peer review to crowdsourced review on the social web — the book will look at the classification of knowledge and academic disciplines, the differences between citations and references, the role of peer review, national research evaluation exercises, the tools used to measure research, the many different types of measurement indicators, and how to measure interdisciplinarity. The book also addresses emerging issues within scholarly communication, including whether or not measurement promotes a "publish or perish" culture, fraud in research, or "citation cartels." It will also look at the stakeholders behind these analytical tools, the adverse effects of these quantifications, and the future of research measurement.

Download Full-text

An Assessment of Scholarly Contributions and Web Visibility among Scientists of CSIR-Building and Road Research Institute, Ghana

Ghana Journal of Science ◽

10.4314/gjs.v61i2.2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 61 (2) ◽

pp. 13-26

Author(s):

N. A. Mingle ◽

N. K. Achampong ◽

D. L. Acheampong

Keyword(s):

Quantitative Research ◽

Citation Impact ◽

The Internet ◽

Journal Articles ◽

Web Presence ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

Scholarly Publications ◽

Almost All ◽

The Impact ◽

Research Institute

The introduction of the internet has revolutionized the dissemination and assessment of research outputs with renewed emphasis on the impact of scholarly publications. The purpose of this study was to measure scholarly presence and citation impact of research scientists of the Building and Road Research Institute (CSIR-BRRI) on the internet. Bibliometrics was employed as a quantitative research method for this study using Google Scholar. The results showed that majority (77.5%) of scientists had at least one scholarly reference on the internet. It also found that, almost all (96.5%) scientists who had scholarly works online showed affiliation to the CSIR-BRRI. Again, it was observed that most mentions/hits were journal publications (59%) followed by thesis (35%). However, the study found that there was a weak positive relationship between number of journal articles and citations online, a clear indication that a web presence does not automatically reflect the usefulness of a scholarly output. It is recommended that scientists identify and research into globally relevant topics and also publish in reputable journals to enhance their visibility.

Download Full-text