scholarly journals BDS in the context of achievements

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Lopes da cunha
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Annual Number ◽  
Positive Trend ◽  
Great Success ◽  
Team Members ◽  
High Profile ◽  
Scientific Report ◽  
Number Of Citations

Impact Factor (IF) means the scientometric index that represents the average annual number of citations that manuscripts published in a specific journal received in the last two or three years [1, 2]. It expresses the relative importance of the journal in the field from the view of scientific community. Different databases have their own impact factor calculation based on the citations in the indexed journals. For the journals that are indexed on Web of Science, they are ranked by JCR (Journal Scientific Report)/ISI (Institute for Science and Information) in JIF (Journal Impact Factor). For Scopus by SJR (Scimago Journal Rank-citescore)/SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper); etc. Since we got Scopus indexation in 2017, BDS has been growing its CiteScore index from 0.3 to 1.0 in 2020 [3]. This bibliometric index shows a positive trend for BDS during the last years. Our team is focused on the future with a score higher than “1.0”. Furthermore, BDS improves its Editorial Board. Twenty-four section editors and 30 assistant editors are directly involved weekly with the process of the manuscripts submitted to the journal. Opportunities arising from the pandemic brought improvements in the speed of evaluation process, in the distribution of the steps, in the partnership, digital or remote meetings, and visibility of the journal. The communion of ideals among the team members led BDS to a high profile on social networks as Instagram, Facebook and LinkedIn. Our posts have been shared with researchers with great success. By 2021, authors and readers can expect issues with the highest quality in science, commitment to innovation, and dissemination. Welcome to BDS journal once again.   References Frankernberger, R., Van Meerbeek, B. JAD in the context of bibliometric data. JAD (2020), n5, p. 439. doi:10.3290/j.jad.a45410 Fernandes V., Salviano LR. Indicadores JCR, SNIP, SJR e Google Scholar. http://portal.utfpr.edu.br/pesquisa-e-pos-graduacao/indicadores/indicadores-externos/indicadores-externos CiteScoreTracker. Scopus. [Internet]. Access in: 16 Dec 2020. Avaiable at: https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/21100831445

Editorial

2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-95
Author(s):  
Charles E. Lyman
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Editorial Board Member ◽  
Initial Letter ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
National Library ◽  
The Past ◽  
Number Of Citations

Microscopy and Microanalysis has made significant strides forward over the past year, and I would like to comment on two of these. First, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) ranked this journal third among the nine microscopy journals it indexes. The ranking was in terms of ISI's Impact Factor, which tracks the number of citations to papers published in the journal. A strong Impact Factor indicates that information in the journal is of interest to other workers in the field. Second, the National Library of Medicine (NLM) has selected Microscopy and Microanalysis to be indexed in MEDLINE (PubMed), beginning with the first issue of 2003. As any biologist will tell you, this listing is essential for the electronic visibility of papers in the fast-moving world of life sciences research. I thank Editorial Board member Dave Piston for his efforts in writing the initial letter of application to the NLM.

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.

The Impact of an International Network (Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup) for Clinical Research on Global Capacity for Gynecologic Cancer Clinical Trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 813-818
Author(s):  
Gavin C.E. Stuart ◽  
Henry C. Kitchener ◽  
Jan B. Vermorken ◽  
Michael J. Quinn ◽  
William Small ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Gynecologic Cancer ◽  
Annual Number ◽  
Steady Increase ◽  
Global Level ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to demonstrate that the construction of the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) has increased collaboration and accrual to high-quality phase 3 trials at a global level.Materials and MethodsThe GCIG is a collaboration of 29 international cooperative clinical trial groups committed to conduct of high-quality phase 3 trials among women with gynecologic cancer. A complete bibliography of the reported phase 3 trials has been developed and is available on the GCIG Web site http://www.gciggroup.com. A “GCIG trial” is a trial in which any 2 or more GCIG member groups are formally involved. We reviewed the output of the GCIG from 1997 to 2015 with respect to member participation and quality of publication (impact factor and citation index). The publications are considered in 3 cohorts, 1997 to 2002, 2003 to 2008, and 2009 to 2014, for the purposes of comparison and progress. A social network map has been developed for these publications to identify how the GCIG has increased capacity for clinical trials globally.ResultsUsing a global map, the number of member groups in the GCIG has increased in each of the 3 periods. The total annual number of publications and citations within the 1997 to 2015 period has increased significantly. The average number of citations per publication is demonstrated in each of the 3 periods. The steady increase in the number of citations is used as a proxy for the impact of the publications. The impact factor of the journal and the number of citations are reported for the 10 most highly cited publications. Finally, using a social networking methodology, networking has visibly and numerically increased in each of the 3 periods.ConclusionsEvidence supports that the construction of the GCIG has increased collaboration and accrual to high-quality phase 3 trials at a global level among women with gynecologic cancer.

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 Mixing journal, article, and author citations, and other pitfalls in the bibliographic impact factor

2003 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1847-1862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miquel Porta ◽  
José L. Copete ◽  
Esteve Fernandez ◽  
Joan Alguacil ◽  
Janeth Murillo
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Health Studies ◽  
Individual Article ◽  
Author Citations ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Specific Number

News of the death of biomedical journals seem premature. Revamped traditional scientific journals remain highly valued sources and vehicles of information, critical debate, and knowledge. Some analyses seem to place a disproportionate emphasis on technological and formal issues, as compared to the importance ascribed to matters of power. Not all journals must necessarily have a large circulation. There are many examples of efficient, high-quality journals with a great impact on relatively small audiences for whom the journal is thought-provoking, useful, and pleasant to read. How can we achieve a better understanding of an article’s spectrum of impacts? A certain mixing of three distinct entities (journals, articles, and authors) has often pervaded judgments. Data used by the Institute for Scientific Information present weaknesses in their accuracy. The two-year limit for citations to count towards the bibliographic impact factor favors "fast-moving", "basic" biomedical disciplines and is less appropriate for public health studies. Increasing attention is given to the specific number of citations received by each individual article. It is possible to make progress towards more valid, accurate, fair, and relevant assessments.

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.

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.

scholarly journals Features of Extreme Precipitation at Progress Station, Antarctica

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (22) ◽  
pp. 9087-9105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lejiang Yu ◽  
Qinghua Yang ◽  
Timo Vihma ◽  
Svetlana Jagovkina ◽  
Jiping Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapor ◽  
Extreme Precipitation ◽  
Dynamic Processes ◽  
Annual Number ◽  
Positive Trend ◽  
Self Organizing Maps ◽  
Dipole Structure ◽  
Extreme Precipitation Events ◽  
Daily Precipitation Data ◽  
Precipitation Events

Observed daily precipitation data were used to investigate the characteristics of precipitation at Antarctic Progress Station and synoptic patterns associated with extreme precipitation events during the period 2003–16. The annual precipitation, annual number of extreme precipitation events, and amount of precipitation during the extreme events have positive trends. The distribution of precipitation at Progress Station is heavily skewed with a long tail of extreme dry days and a high peak of extreme wet days. The synoptic pattern associated with extreme precipitation events is a dipole structure of negative and positive height anomalies to the west and east of Progress Station, respectively, resulting in water vapor advection to the station. For the first time, we apply self-organizing maps (SOMs) to examine thermodynamic and dynamic perspectives of trends in the frequency of occurrence of Antarctic extreme precipitation events. The changes in thermodynamic (noncirculation) processes explain 80% of the trend, followed by the changes in the interaction between thermodynamic and dynamic processes, which account for nearly 25% of the trend. The changes in dynamic processes make a negative (less than 5%) contribution to the trend. The positive trend in total column water vapor over the Southern Ocean explains the change of thermodynamic term.

CMS at 13: a retrospective of the journey

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Farrukh ◽  
Ali Raza ◽  
Fanchen Meng ◽  
Yihua Wu
Keyword(s):  
Future Research ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Future Research Directions ◽  
Objective View ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
Innovation Leadership ◽  
Number Of Citations

Purpose To commemorate the 13th anniversary of the Chinese Management Studies (CMS) and suggest future research directions, this study aims to present an overview of the CMS through a systematic bibliometric analysis from 2007 to 2019. The analysis emphasizes the trend of themes, structure of publications and citations, the most cited publications, the most productive authors, universities, countries and regions. Design/methodology/approach The study uses the data extracted from the Scopus database to present an overview; besides, it also uses VOSviewer and Bibliometrix software packages to visualize the intellectual network of CMS. Findings This analysis is based on 486 publications between 2007 and 2019. Results show that there is a rising trend in the number of citations to CMS. The researchers from China were the most frequent contributors to the journal, whereas researchers from the USA, Taiwan, Singapore and Australia were well represented. In addition, the results show that innovation, leadership, human resource management and corporate social responsibility have been the most important research themes in the journal. Practical implications This study offers an objective view of the CMS publication structure. The study’s findings can help the journal readers obtain a quick snapshot of the leading trends occurring in the journal. Furthermore, this study provides future research directions for the journals by underscoring important themes. Originality/value As the journal’s first retrospective, this study not only educates and enriches CMS’ global readers and aspiring contributors but can also be useful to its editorial board, as it provides several inputs in the form of future research directions to guide the journal’s progress.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document