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 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 Trends in Research on Art Therapy Indexed in the Web of Science: A Bibliometric Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Rodriguez Novo ◽  
Maria Mercedes Novo Muñoz ◽  
Leticia Cuellar-Pompa ◽  
Jose Angel Rodriguez Gomez
Keyword(s):  
Art Therapy ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Visual Arts ◽  
Core Collection ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Production ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Number Of Citations

Aim: Despite the increase in international research in art therapy, few studies have been developed with a bibliometric approach which describe the situation regarding this area of knowledge. Thus, the aim of this study is to describe and contextualize international scientific production in the visual arts modality in the context of artistic therapies, to offer a broader and more in-depth vision of the structure of this area of knowledge through of a bibliometric analysis of the publications indexed in the core collection of the Web of Science.Methods: This is a retrospective, exploratory and descriptive, cross-sectional study to analyze the bibliographic data retrieved from the databases of the core collection. The analysis parameters included the data corresponding to the production according to type of document, country, journal, and institution. In addition, the main lines of research were located and classified and the subject matter of the most cited articles in each of them was summarized. Four periods were selected, between 1994 and 2020, to facilitate the thematic analysis and offer an evolutionary perspective of art therapy research.Results: A total of 563 works were published, in 250 journals, in the 63 years between 1958, when the first document was published, and April 2021. The annual growth rate was 7.3% with a mean average of 8.7 publications per year, and 83.13% of the published works were articles. A total of 1,269 authors from 56 countries were counted. The mean number of citations per document was 5.6 and the mean number of citations per document and year was 0.6. The main research domains were psychology and/or rehabilitation and the highest production on this topic was concentrated in only three journals. In general, a high degree of variability was observed in the study topics and numerous theoretical and methodological articles. The most used visual arts modalities were in the main drawing, painting and photography.Conclusion: This work did not find previous existence of any bibliometric analysis on the international scientific production in art therapy. In general terms, there has been a substantial growth in the number of publications on the subject over the last decade. However, this research area does not appear to have peaked, but, on the contrary, is still growing and progressing despite its long history in clinical practice.

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 Próba analizy bibliometrycznej publikacji 25. Zjazdu Katedr Marketingu, Handlu i Konsumpcji - doświadczenia przeszłości i wyzwania przyszłości

2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (15) ◽  
pp. 170-182
Author(s):  
Jan Wiktor
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Publication Output ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Bibliometric Data ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Marketing Literature ◽  
Academic Fields ◽  
The Impact ◽  
25Th Congress

The paper endeavours to assess the publications from 25th Congress of Marketing, Commerce and Consumption Departments, which took place in Toruń in 2014, using a bibliometric analysis. It consists of two parts. The first focuses on the essence of bibliometrics, its importance in the academic activity and in communicating research results. The second part presents findings of the author’s own query, and an analysis of publication output of the 2014 congress. Research has utilized the basic bibliometric data (country of origin, the author, language and a form of publication). The analyzed material consisted of 195 papers, in which altogether there were 3164 texts of Polish (49,8%) and foreign (50,2%) authors. The impact factor of previous congresses was very small – 0,6%. This analysis has a preliminary and limited character. It is recommended that an extended and deeper bibliometric research on the marketing literature in Poland should be undertaken, and a marketing impact factor (of marketing literature) on other academic fields and disciplines need to be created. A first step should focus on the formation of a set of marketing, market, commerce and consumption journals which positions and „effectiveness” in terms of bibliometrics is significant. It would be a community’s answer to the „challenges of the future,” which were underlined during the second part of the 25th Congress of Departments in Toruń in 2014.

Impact factors, citations, and GEOPHYSICS

Geophysics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 3MA-17MA ◽  
Author(s):  
Markku Peltoniemi
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Threshold Value ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Geophysical Prospecting ◽  
Geophysical Research ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
History Of Geophysics ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

This review assesses the contributions and impact that GEOPHYSICS journal has made to both the theory and the applications of exploration geophysics during its publication life span. The contributions are evaluated first on the basis of Journal Citation Reports data, which summarize information available since 1975 about the impact factor of our journal. The impact factor for GEOPHYSICS in 1975–2002 has ranged between 1.461 and 0.591, with an average of 0.924 and with a relative ranking between 16 and 45 for all journals in its category. The journal receiving the highest impact factor for the period 2000–2003 in the “Geochemistry and Geophysics” category is Reviews of Geophysics, with an average impact factor of 7.787 and which ranged between 9.226 and 6.083. A second and important criterion is the frequency with which individual papers published in GEOPHYSICS have been cited elsewhere. This information is available for the entire publication history of GEOPHYSICS and supports the choices made for the early classic papers. These were listed in both the Silver and the Golden Anniversary issues of GEOPHYSICS. In August 2004, the five most-cited papers in GEOPHYSICS published in the time period 1936 to February 2003 are Thomsen (1986) with 423 citations, Constable et al. (1987) with 380 citations, Cagniard (1953) with 354 citations, Sen et al. (1981) with 313 citations, and Stolt (1978) with 307 citations. Fifteen more papers exceed a threshold value of 200 citations. During 2000–2002, GEOPHYSICS, Geophysical Prospecting, Geophysical Journal International, and Journal of Applied Geophysics were the four journals with the highest number of citations of papers published in GEOPHYSICS. In the same 2000–2002 period, those journals in which papers published in GEOPHYSICS are cited most are GEOPHYSICS, Geophysical Prospecting, Geophysical Journal International, and Journal of Geophysical Research. During 1985, the total number of citations in all journals in the Science Citation Index database to papers published in GEOPHYSICS was 2657. By 2002, this same citation count for GEOPHYSICS had increased to 4784.

scholarly journals Bibliometric analysis about Economics approach to Bitcoins

Exacta ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-52
Author(s):  
Carla Cristiane Sokulski ◽  
Rafael Vignoli de Moura ◽  
Gustavo Tadra Waldmann ◽  
Antonio Carlos de Francisco ◽  
Gustavo Dambiski Gomes de Carvalho
Keyword(s):  
Network Analysis ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Wide Field ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
The University ◽  
The Web

The objective of this article is to identify the main characteristics of scientific research regarding the approach economic about bitcoins. This study is based on bibliometric research and network analysis, with the use of descriptive statistics in 84 articles found on the Web of Science database.  The analysis used the programs VOSviewer and Excel. The main results show that Bouri, Bouoiyour, Dyhrberg and Selmi are the authors who published most articles and that the Université de Pau (France) and the University College Dublin (Ireland) are the institutions with most publications. The journal with most publications is Plos One, which presented a 3.057 impact factor. There are only three co-authoring networks with greater expressiveness, however, there are no links between them and the others. Despite the growing number of publications on the subject, the researchs is beginning, showing a wide field of exploration.

scholarly journals Citation patterns between impact-factor and questionable journals

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

AbstractOne of the most fundamental issues in academia today is understanding the differences between legitimate and questionable 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 lists of questionable journals (Beall’s and Cabell’s), one of which has not been updated for a few years, to identify the so-called 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 questionable journals. For this purpose, 65 questionable journals from social sciences and 2338 Web-of-Science-indexed journals that cited these questionable journals were examined in-depth in terms of index coverages, subject categories, impact factors and self-citation patterns. We have analysed 3234 unique cited papers from questionable journals and 5964 unique citing papers (6750 citations of cited papers) from Web of Science journals. We found that 13% of the questionable papers were cited by WoS journals and 37% of the citations were from impact-factor journals. The findings show that neither the impact factor of citing journals nor the size of cited journals is a good predictor of the number of citations to the questionable journals.

scholarly journals 100 Most Cited Articles in Urban Green and Open Spaces: A Bibliometric Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 445-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehdi Rakhshandehroo ◽  
Mohd Yusof ◽  
Nader Ebrahim ◽  
Ali Sharghi ◽  
Roozbeh Arabi
Keyword(s):  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Linear Trend ◽  
Open Spaces ◽  
Urban Green ◽  
Author Keywords ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Online Web

Researchers have contributed significantly to the development of the subject of urban green and open spaces (UGOS) in both practical and fundamental aspects. As the number of citations indicates a paper and author’s competency, the online web of science (ISI) was browsed to identify the 100 most cited papers in the field of UGOS from 1980 to 2013. Papers were analyzed for authorship, journal sources, publishers, institutions, countries, year of publication, categories, and author keywords. The total number of citations was compared to the average number of citations per year. From 1105 UGOS papers returned, the maximum number of citations was 212. The top 100 most cited were published from 1988 to 2011, with the majority in 2007. A remarkable distinction was found in the comparison of total citations and average citations per year. As total linear trend indicates a significant growth in influential articles, urban green and open spaces are a developing subject in landscape and urban planning. This study gives an insight into the readership of UGOS by highlighting key papers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document