scholarly journals 3104 Characterizing the top 100 articles in benign prostatic hyperplasia literature using bibliometric analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 27-27
Author(s):  
Alan Paniagua Cruz ◽  
Chad Ellimoottil ◽  
Casey A. Dauw ◽  
Ted A. Skolarus
Keyword(s):  
Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Prostatic Hyperplasia ◽  
Field Methods ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Prostatic Enlargement ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The prevalence of BPH, coupled with associated disability ranging from quality of life impairments to hospitalization, has spurred decades of research into its pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. For these reasons, we conducted a study to characterize the current landscape of BPH literature, including the most commonly cited articles impacting the field. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We used the Web of ScienceTM databases to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the top 100 leading BPH articles. Bibliometric analyses are quantitative approaches examining the impact of academic literature. We used the following search terms: ‘benign prostatic hyperplasia’ and ‘benign prostatic enlargement.’ We identified and characterized the 100 most-cited BPH articles including their citations, journal, author, year, and country through September 2018. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The top 100 BPH articles were published between 1978 and 2012. The number of citations ranged from 143 to 2,158 across 26 different journals, including 9 urology-specific journals. The Journal of Urology (5-year impact factor: 4.91) was the most published journal with 26 articles, followed by European Urology (5-year impact factor: 15.66) with 16, and Urology (5-year impact factor: 2.39) with 13. The oldest 10 articles in the top 100 mainly focused on BPH etiology/pathogenesis, while the newest 10 articles mainly focused on medical treatment. The 1990’s was the most productive decade accounting for nearly half of the top 100 articles (n=46). Eight authors had two or more first author publications, and 8 institutions had five or more publications in the top 100. Thirteen different countries were represented in the top 100 articles, with the US (n = 64), Italy (n=7), and Germany (n=5) being the most common. The articles were published in the following Web of Science Categories: Urology & Nephrology (n=68), Medicine, General & Internal (n=15), and Endocrinology & Metabolism (n=7). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This study represents the first bibliometric analysis of the leading 100 BPH articles impacting the academic literature. The literature focus has evolved from BPH pathogenesis/etiology to treatment, and was primarily published in 3 specialty journals. Our findings highlight the most impactful BPH literature, and may be used to guide research and funding priorities for this increasingly common condition.

scholarly journals Bibliometric analysis of multi-language veterinary journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-353
Author(s):  
Erwin KRAUSKOPF ◽  
Fernanda GARCIA ◽  
Robert FUNK
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Citation Distribution ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Main Language

Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between language and total number of citations found among documents in journals written in English and other languages. We selected all the journals clustered together in the Journal Citation Reports 2014 under the subject category “Veterinary Sciences” and downloaded all the data registered between 1994-2013 by Web of Science for the journals that stated publishing documents in languages other than English. We classified each of these journals by quartile and extracted information regarding their impact factor, language(s) stated, country of origin, total number of documents published, total number of reviews published, percentage of documents published in English and the quartile in which each journal ranked. Of the 48,118 documents published by the 28 journals analyzed, 55.8% were published in English. Interestingly, although most of the journals state being multi-language, most documents published in quartile 1 journals were in English (an average of 99.2%), while the percentage was 93.1% in quartile 2 journals, 62.1% in quartile 3 journals and 27.4% in quartile 4 journals. We also confirmed that citation distribution in these journals was highly skewed. The results of this study suggest that journals should consider adopting English as the main language as this will increase citation counts and the impact factor of the journal.

A bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Membrane Science (1976-2010)

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 698-713 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui-Zhen Fu ◽  
Yuh-Shan Ho
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Chemical Engineering ◽  
Life Cycles ◽  
Polymer Science ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Membrane Science

Purpose – This study aims to examine publication characteristics and development of a science journal Journal of Membrane Science (JMS) with 35 years ' history by bibliometric indicators. Design/methodology/approach – A bibliometric approach was used to identify its document types, impact factor, publication outputs, most cited articles and large contributing countries/territories and institutions. The main indicators included impact factor, CPP (citations per publication), TC2010 (number of citations from one paper’s publication to the end of 2010), C2010 (number of citations in the year of 2010), number of total articles, “single country articles” and “single institution articles”, “internationally collaborative articles” and “inter-institutionally collaborative articles”, “first author articles” and “corresponding author articles”. The annual citations of most cited articles were displayed in a table list. Findings – The two-year citation window used by impact factor is not fair for a journal which had its peak annual citations in the third or more years. JMS would get a better citation performance if impact factor can be calculated for three or four years. Impact factor is affected by the size of its subject categories. JMS showed higher impact factor rankings in both chemical engineering and polymer science category in the early twenty-first century. Furthermore, the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the UK and the USA) contributed more than a half of the total, with higher CPP. National University of Singapore, University of Twente and Chinese Academy of Sciences were the main contributing institutions. The citation life cycles revealed the impact history of most cited articles. Originality/value – A bibliometric analysis has been carried out to analyze the characteristics of a journal with 35 years ' history. Some improved indicators including TC2010, C2010, TP, SP, CP, FP and RP have been used for the evaluation. This study provides an evidence from JMS to discuss the feasibility and limitations of impact factor.

scholarly journals Clinical significance of prostatic-urethral angulation on the treatment outcome of patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia treated with tamsulosin hydrochloride

2015 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 238
Author(s):  
Hassan El-Tatawy ◽  
Tarek Gameel ◽  
Mohammed Abo El-enen ◽  
Ayman Hagras ◽  
Ayman Mousa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia ◽  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Treatment Efficacy ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostatic Hyperplasia ◽  
Final Conclusion ◽  
P Value ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the prostatic-urethral angulation (PUA) on the treatment efficacy of selective alpha-1A receptor blocker in male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Materials and methods: A total of 80 patients with LUTS/BPH and with mean age 53.3 ± 6.3 (range 47-70) were included in our prospective comparative study. The patients were classified into 2 groups as a consecutive cases 40 in each one depending on the PUA either ≤ 35° (group A) or &gt; 35° (group B). PUA and different prostatic parameters were measured using transrectal ultrasound. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA), the International Prostate Symptom Score and quality of life score (IPSS/QoL score), maximum flow rate (Q<sub>max</sub>), and postvoid residual (PVR) volume were compared between the groups. The clinical significance of PUA was evaluated after 8 weeks of medical treatment with tamsulosin hydrochloride 0.4 mg daily. Results: Baseline evaluation (pre-treatment) for both groups were comparable to each other with no clinically significant difference regarding age, PSA, IPSS/QoL score, Qmax and PVR volume (P-value &gt; 0.05). Comparison of parameters after 8 weeks showed that tamsulosin hydrochloride improved the total IPSS and all subscores (P &lt; 0.001), QoL (P = 0.001), Q<sub>max</sub> (P = 0.002), and PVR (P = 0.04) in group A (Table 1). Conclusion: Tamsulosin hydrochloride appears to be less effective in improving IPSS/Qol score, Qmax and PVR in patients with lager PUA. The PUA might be a predictor for the treatment efficacy of α-blockers and more studies are warranted in the future before the final conclusion.

scholarly journals Quality weighted citations versus total citations in the sciences and social sciences, with an application to finance and accounting

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 324-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chia-Lin Chang ◽  
Michael McAleer
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Additional Measure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Article Influence

Purpose – Both journal self-citations and exchanged citations have the effect of increasing a journal’s impact factor, which may be deceptive. The purpose of this paper is to analyse academic journal quality and research impact using quality-weighted citations vs total citations, based on the widely used Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science citations database (ISI). A new Index of Citations Quality (ICQ) is presented, based on quality-weighted citations. Design/methodology/approach – The new index is used to analyse the leading 500 journals in both the sciences and social sciences, as well as finance and accounting, using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAMs) that are based on alternative transformations of citations. Findings – It is shown that ICQ is a useful additional measure to 2-year impact factor (2YIF) and other well-known RAMs for the purpose of evaluating the impact and quality, as well as ranking, of journals as it contains information that has very low correlations with the information contained in the well-known RAMs for both the sciences and social sciences, and finance and accounting. Practical implications – Journals can, and do, inflate the number of citations through self-citation practices, which may be coercive. Another method for distorting journal impact is through a set of journals agreeing to cite each other, that is, by exchanging citations. This may be less coercive than self-citations, but is nonetheless unprofessional and distortionary. Social implications – The premise underlying the use of citations data is that higher quality journals generally have a higher number of citations. The impact of citations can be distorted in a number of ways, both consciously and unconsciously. Originality/value – Regardless of whether self-citations arise through collusive practices, the increase in citations will affect both 2YIF and 5-year impact factor (5YIF), though not Eigenfactor and Article Influence. This leads to an ICQ, where a higher ICQ would generally be preferred to lower. Unlike 5YIF, which is increased by journal self-citations and exchanged citations, and Eigenfactor and Article Influence, both of which are affected by quality-weighted exchanged citations, ICQ will be less affected by exchanged citations. In the absence of any empirical evidence to the contrary, 5YIF and AI are assumed to be affected similarly by exchanged citations.

scholarly journals A bibliometric analysis of greenwashing research: a closer look at agriculture, food industry and food retail

2021 ◽  
Vol 123 (13) ◽  
pp. 547-560
Author(s):  
Antonio Montero-Navarro ◽  
Thais González-Torres ◽  
José-Luis Rodríguez-Sánchez ◽  
Rocio Gallego-Losada
Keyword(s):  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Food Industry ◽  
The Body ◽  
Intellectual Structure ◽  
Food Retail ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Major Development ◽  
The Impact

PurposeThis paper aims at providing an overview and synthesis of the existing body of knowledge about greenwashing. Special attention is paid to the articles directly linked with agriculture, food industry and food retail.Design/methodology/approachA bibliometric analysis was performed over 351 documents extracted from the WoS database, using SciMAT and VOSviewer software programs.FindingsThree periods in the academic literature about greenwashing can be distinguished: ground-setting (2003–2010), trail-blazing (2011–2015) and remarkable growth (2016–2020). Along this evolution, a body of knowledge which stemmed from the literature about CSR has achieved a major development, deploying different research lines such as stakeholders' management, marketing and communication and audit. A specific analysis of the academic literature about greenwashing in agriculture, food industry and food retail has been carried out, showing a need for further development.Social implicationsThe development of scientific knowledge about greenwashing puts this social claim on the spotlight of business management studies, helping to fight greenwashing and, this way, to reduce the environmental impact of corporate activities. Studying greenwashing will help to reduce its frequency and, therefore, heal the planet.Originality/valueSome previous studies have provided systematic reviews of the literature using different approaches, but they did not untangle the intellectual structure and the evolution of the body of research about greenwashing. This article originally provides a thorough analysis of these aspects, as well as a closer look at the impact of greenwashing practices in the academic literature regarding agriculture, food industry and food retail.

scholarly journals Understanding citation patterns between impact-factor and blacklisted journals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel Kulczycki ◽  
Marek Hołowiecki ◽  
Zehra Taskin ◽  
Franciszek Krawczyk
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Predatory Journals ◽  
Subject Categories ◽  
Citation Indexes ◽  
Predatory Publishing ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

One of the most fundamental issues in academia today is understanding the differences between legitimate and predatory publishing. While decision-makers and managers consider journals indexed in popular citation indexes such as Web of Science or Scopus as legitimate, they use two blacklists (Beall’s and Cabell’s), one of which has not been updated for a few years, to identify predatory journals. The main aim of our study is to reveal the contribution of the journals accepted as legitimate by the authorities to the visibility of blacklisted journals. For this purpose, 65 blacklisted journals in social sciences and 2,338 Web-of-Science-indexed journals that cited these blacklisted journals were examined in-depth in terms of index coverages, subject categories, impact factors and self-citation patterns. We have analysed 3,234 unique cited papers from blacklisted journals and 5,964 unique citing papers (6,750 citations of cited papers) from Web of Science journals. We found that 13% of the blacklisted papers were cited by WoS journals and 37% of the citations were from impact-factor journals. As a result, although the impact factor is used by decision-makers to determine the levels of the journals, it has been revealed that there is no significant relationship between the impact factor and the number of citations to blacklisted journals. On the other hand, country and author self-citation practices of the journals should be considered. All the findings of this study underline the importance of the second part of this study, which will examine the contents of citations to articles published in predatory journals because understanding the motivations of the authors who cited blacklisted journals is important to correctly understand the citation patterns between impact-factor and blacklisted journals.

scholarly journals Microfracture: State of the Art in Cartilage Surgery?

Cartilage ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Frehner ◽  
Jan P. Benthien
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Yearly Average ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

Objective This study is a literature review from 2010 to 2014 concerning the quality of evidence in clinical trials about microfracture in attempt to repair articular cartilage. We have decided to focus on microfracturing, since this seems to be the best documented technique. Interest in evaluation of publication quality has risen in orthopaedic sports medicine recently. Therefore, we think it is necessary to evaluate recent clinical trials being rated for their evidence-based medicine (EBM) quality. We also compared the mean impact factor of the journals publishing the different studies as an indicator of the study’s citation and evaluated for a change over the studied time frame. Design To measure the EBM level, we applied the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) introduced by Jakobsen. The impact factor, which is a measurement of the yearly average number of citations of articles recently published in that journal, was evaluated according to self-reported values on the corresponding journal’s website. Results We found that the mean CMS has not changed between 2010 and 2014. The mean impact factor has also not changed between 2010 and 2014. The CMS variance was high, pointing to different qualities in the evaluated studies. There is no evidence that microfracturing is superior compared to other cartilage repair procedures. Conclusion Microfracture cannot be seen as an evidence based procedure. Further research needs to be done and a standardization of the operating method is desirable. There need to be more substantial studies on microfracturing alone without additional therapies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document