Association of h-index of Editorial Board Members and Impact Factor among Radiology Journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solmaz Asnafi ◽  
Tina Gunderson ◽  
Robert J. McDonald ◽  
David F. Kallmes
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Board Members ◽  
H Index

scholarly journals The h-Index of Editorial Board Members Correlates Positively With the Impact Factor of Sports Medicine Journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596711769402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Kay ◽  
Muzammil Memon ◽  
Darren de SA ◽  
Nicole Simunovic ◽  
Andrew Duong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Faculty Position ◽  
H Index ◽  
The Impact

Background: The h-index is a metric widely used to present both the productivity and impact of an author’s previous publications. Purpose: To evaluate and observe any correlations among the h-indices of 2015 editorial board members from 8 top sports medicine journals. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: The sex, country of residence, degree, and faculty position of the editorial board members were identified using their respective scientific publication profiles. The h-index and other bibliometric indicators of these editorial board members were obtained using both the Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS) databases. Nonparametric statistics were used to analyze differences in h-index values, and regression models were used to assess the ability of the editorial board member’s h-index to predict their journal’s impact factor (IF). Results: A total of 422 editorial board members were evaluated. The median h-index of all editors was 20 (interquartile range [IQR], 19) using GS and 15 (IQR, 15) using WoS. GS h-index values were 1.19 times higher than WoS, with significant correlation between these values ( r2 = 0.88, P = .0001). Editorial board members with a PhD had significantly higher h-indices than those without (GS, P = .0007; WoS, P = .0002), and full professors had higher h-indices than associate and assistant professors (GS, P = .0001; WoS, P = .0001). Overall, there were significant differences in the distribution of the GS ( P < .0001) and WoS ( P < .0001) h-indices of the editorial board members by 2014 IF of the journals. Both the GS h-index (β coefficient, 0.01228; 95% CI, 0.01035-0.01423; P < .0001) as well as the WoS h-index (β coefficient, 0.01507; 95% CI, 0.01265-0.01749; P < .0001) of editorial board members were significant predictors of the 2014 IF of their journal. Conclusion: The h-indices of editorial board members of top sports medicine journals are significant predictors of the IF of their respective journals.

scholarly journals Looking back and moving forward: a bibliographic survey of the Hungarian-language Orvosi Hetilap

2012 ◽  
Vol 153 (48) ◽  
pp. 1905-1917
Author(s):  
Anna Berhidi ◽  
Zsuzsa Margittai ◽  
Lívia Vasas
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Scientific Journal ◽  
Epidemiological Data ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Hungarian Language ◽  
Number Of Citations

Introduction: The first step in the process of acquisition of impact factor for a scientific journal is to get registered at Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. Aim: The aim of this article is to evaluate the content and structure of Orvosi Hetilap with regards to selection criteria of Thomson Reuters, in particular to objectives of citation analysis. Methods: Authors evaluated issues of Orvosi Hetilap published in 2011 and calculated the unofficial impact factor of the journal based on systematic search in various citation index databases. Number of citations, quality of citing journals and scientific output of the editorial board members were evaluated. Adherence to guidelines of international publishers was assessed, as well. Results: Unofficial impact factor of Orvosi Hetilap has been continuously rising every year in the past decade (except for 2004 and 2010). The articles of Orvosi Hetilap are widely cited by international authors and high impact factor journals, too. Further, more than half the articles cited are open access. The most frequently cited categories are original and review articles as well as clinical studies. Orvosi Hetilap is a weekly published journal, which is covered by many international databases such as PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews. As regards to the scientific output of the editorial board members, the truncated mean of the number of their publications was 497, citations 2446, independent citations 2014 and h-index 21. Conclusions: While Orvosi Hetilap fulfils many criteria for getting covered by Thomson Reuters, it is worthwhile to implement a method of online citation system in order to increase the number of citations. In addition, scientific publications of all editorial board members should be made easily accessible. Finally, publications of comparative studies by multiple authors are encouraged as well as papers containing epidemiological data analyses. Orv. Hetil., 2012, 153, 1905–1917.

scholarly journals A96 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY AUTHORSHIP AND EDITORIAL BOARDS

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 70-71
Author(s):  
N Jawaid ◽  
K Leung ◽  
N Bollegala
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Journal Citation Report ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Gender Distribution ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Editorial Boards ◽  
Canadian Association ◽  
Male Dominated

Abstract Background Women are numerically under-represented in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology. Aims To characterize the gender distribution of first and senior authors and editorial board members of the highest impact factor journals in gastroenterology and hepatology. Methods Using Clarivate Journal Citation Report 2019, the 28 highest ranked journals within gastroenterology and hepatology were selected for review, along with the Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. Publications between January 1 to December 31, 2019 were included. Gender of board members and authors was identified using publicly available data. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated using SPSS to assess for a relationship between editorial board, first author, and senior author gender as well as impact factor. Results Of 29 journals assessed with a median impact factor of 5.55 (IQR 3.72–9.10), 357 journal issues and 8036 articles were reviewed. Three journals were headed by female chief editors, constituting 7.7% of all editors-in-chief (3/39). In total, females made up 17.1% of editorial board members (n=584). Of 8036 first authors, 2547 (31.7%) were female. Of 7335 senior authors, 1390 (19.3%) were female. There were no statistically significant correlations between impact factor and gender. Chief editor gender did not significantly correlate with gender distribution of editorial boards, first or senior authors. There was a significant positive correlation between male-dominated editorial boards and male first and senior authorship, versus a significant negative correlation between male-dominated editorial boards and female first and senior authorship. A positive correlation exists for the same gender between first and senior authors. Conclusions Although gender distribution of female first and senior authorship approaches current distributions in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology, editor-in-chief positions and editorial board membership on journals continue to be occupied by men in higher proportions. Future endeavors such as diversity statements and mentorship may help to balance these distributions in the future. Funding Agencies None

scholarly journals Academic tweeting in #ObGyn. Where do we stand?

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (8) ◽  
pp. 867-870
Author(s):  
Ghanshyam S. Yadav ◽  
Nupur R. Nagarkatti ◽  
Sagar O. Rohondia ◽  
Hadi Erfani ◽  
Charles C. Kilpatrick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
New England ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Physician Leaders ◽  
Twitter Account ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Twitter Activity

Abstract Objective To describe the scenario of academic tweeting and utilization of Twitter by editorial board members of the leading journal in obstetrics and gynecology. Methods The Twitter presence of an editorial board members of obstetrics and gynecology journal with an impact factor greater than 4 was determined. Details of their Twitter activity, year of graduation from medical school and gender were analyzed. Median SparkScore™, an online influence measure, of journals was compared to the highest impact factor journals in medicine (New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The British Medical Journal and Journal of the American Medical Association). Results In the six highest impact factor journals in obstetrics and gynecology, 92 of 240 (38.3%) editorial board members had an active Twitter account. The Twitter presence of editorial members of Obstetrics and Gynecology was statistically less when compared to all other journals (P < 0.01). The median number of tweets in the last 24 h and 7 days were 0. Median SparkScore™ for the highest impact factor obstetrics and gynecology journals (24) were lower compared to the highest impact journals in medicine (66) (P = 0.03). Conclusion Editorial board members of the six highest impact factor journals in obstetrics and gynecology are not capitalizing on the dynamic nature of Twitter and its instant convenient access from our smartphones to further academia, when compared to specialties in medicine. There is a need for increased adoption of Twitter among physician leaders in the specialty.

scholarly journals The Congress Impact Factor: A proposal from board members of the World Society of Emergency Surgeons.it (WSES) and Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC)

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 1185
Author(s):  
Belinda De Simone ◽  
Luca Ansaloni ◽  
Micheal Denis Kelly ◽  
Federico Coccolini ◽  
Massimo Sartelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
World Society ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Academic Quality ◽  
Scientific Validity ◽  
H Index ◽  
Index Analysis ◽  
The World ◽  
The Mean

Many scientific congresses and conferences are held every year around the world. The aim of the World Society of Emergency Surgeons.it (WSES) and Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC) was to develop a simple mathematical parameter as an indicator of academic quality and scientific validity of a congress. In this opinion article, a new metric, the Congress Impact Factor (IFc), is proposed taking into consideration the widely used Impact Factor as an indicator of journals’ prestige and using H-index analysis. The IFc is derived from the mathematical ratio between the mean H-index of invited lecturers normalized for lecture topic and number of lectures in the conference. In case of multiple sessions, the mean of all IFc is calculated along with its standard deviation.  We conclude that the IFc can be a useful measure for evaluating and comparing congress prestige, and may also represent a potentially useful parameter for improving academic curriculum and helping participants to choose the more prestigious meetings for their education.

scholarly journals The Congress Impact Factor: A proposal from board members of the World Society of Emergency Surgeons.it (WSES) and Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC)

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 1185
Author(s):  
Belinda De Simone ◽  
Luca Ansaloni ◽  
Micheal Denis Kelly ◽  
Federico Coccolini ◽  
Massimo Sartelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
World Society ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Academic Quality ◽  
Scientific Validity ◽  
H Index ◽  
Index Analysis ◽  
The World ◽  
The Mean

Many scientific congresses and conferences are held every year around the world. The aim of the World Society of Emergency Surgeons.it (WSES) and Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC) was to develop a simple mathematical parameter as an indicator of academic quality and scientific validity of a congress. In this opinion article, a new metric, the Congress Impact Factor (IFc), is proposed taking into consideration the widely used Impact Factor as an indicator of journals’ prestige and using H-index analysis. The IFc is derived from the mathematical ratio between the mean H-index of invited lecturers normalized for lecture topic and number of lectures in the conference. In case of multiple sessions, the mean of all IFc is calculated along with its standard deviation.  We conclude that the IFc can be a useful measure for evaluating and comparing congress prestige, and may also represent a potentially useful parameter for improving academic curriculum and helping participants to choose the more prestigious meetings for their education.

The unknown acquaintance, or the impact factor and others

2007 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. 165-171
Author(s):  
Anna Berhidi ◽  
Edit Csajbók ◽  
Lívia Vasas
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Analysis ◽  
Index Number ◽  
Scientific Performance ◽  
H Index ◽  
Master List ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Impact

Nobody doubts the importance of the scientific performance’s evaluation. At the same time its way divides the group of experts. The present study mostly deals with the models of citation-analysis based evaluation. The aim of the authors is to present the background of the best known tool – Impact factor – since, according to the authors’ experience, to the many people use without knowing it well. In addition to the „nonofficial impact factor” and Euro-factor, the most promising index-number, h-index is presented. Finally new initiation – Index Copernicus Master List – is delineated, which is suitable to rank journals. Studying different indexes the authors make a proposal and complete the method of long standing for the evaluation of scientific performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document