scholarly journals Bibliometric study of ‘overviews of systematic reviews’ of health interventions: evaluation of prevalence, citation and impact factor

Author(s):  
Carole Lunny ◽  
Trish Neelakant ◽  
Alyssa Chen ◽  
Gavindeep Shinger ◽  
Adrienne Stevens ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Overviews synthesising the results of multiple systematic reviews help inform evidence-based clinical practice. In this first of two companion papers, we evaluate the bibliometrics of overviews, including their prevalence and factors affecting citation rates and JIF (JIF).Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Epistemonikos and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). We included overviews that: (a) synthesised reviews, (b) conducted a systematic search, (c) had a methods section, and (d) examined a healthcare intervention. Multivariable regression was conducted to determine the association between citation density, JIF and 6 predictor variables. Results: We found 1218 overviews published from 2000 to 2020; the majority (73%) were published in the most recent 5-year period. We extracted a selection of these overviews (n=541; 44%) dated from 2000 to 2018. The 541 overviews were published in 307 journals; CDSR (8%), PLOS ONE (3%) and Sao Paulo Medical Journal (2%) were the most prevalent. The majority (70%) were published in journals with impact factors between 0.05 and 3.97. We found a mean citation count of 10 overviews per year, published in journals with a mean JIF of 4.4. In multivariable analysis, overviews with a high number of citations and JIFs had more authors, larger sample sizes, were open access and reported the funding source. Conclusions: An 8-fold increase in the number of overviews was found between 2009 and 2020. We identified 332 overviews published in 2020, which is equivalent to 1 overview published per day. Overviews perform above average for the journals in which they publish.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole Lunny ◽  
Trish Neelakant ◽  
Alyssa Chen ◽  
Gavindeep Shinger ◽  
Adrienne Stevens ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Overviews synthesising the results of multiple systematic reviews help inform evidence-based clinical practice. In this first of two companion papers, we evaluate the bibliometrics of overviews, including their prevalence and factors affecting citation rates and journal impact factor.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Epistemonikos and Cochrane databases. We included overviews that: (a) synthesised reviews, (b) conducted a systematic search, (c) had a methods section, and (d) examined a healthcare intervention. Multivariate regression was conducted to determine the association between citation density, impact factor and 6 predictor variables. Results: We found 1218 overviews published from 2000 to 2020; the majority (73%) were published in the most recent 5-year period. We extracted a selection of these overviews (n=541; 44%) dated from 2000 to 2018. The 541 overviews were published in 307 journals; Cochrane Database (8%), PLOS ONE (3%) and Sao Paulo Medical Journal (2%) were the most prevalent. The majority (70%) were published in journals with impact factors between 0.05 and 3.97. We found a mean citation count of 10 overviews per year, published in journals with a mean impact factor of 4.4. In multivariate analysis, overviews with a high number of citations and impact factors had more authors, larger sample sizes, were open access and reported the funding source. Conclusions: An 8-fold increase in the number of overviews was found between 2009 and 2020. We identified 332 overviews published in 2020, which is equivalent to 1 overview published per day. Overviews perform above average for the journals in which they publish.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole Lunny ◽  
Trish Neelakant ◽  
Alyssa Chen ◽  
Gavindeep Shinger ◽  
Adrienne Stevens ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Overviews synthesizing the results of multiple systematic reviews help inform evidence-based clinical practice. In this first of two companion papers, we evaluate the bibliometrics of ‘overviews of systematic reviews’, including their prevalence, number of citations, and factors affecting citation rates and journal impact factor.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane library databases. We applied eligibility criteria to identify overviews that: (a) aimed to focus on synthesizing reviews, (b) conducted a systematic search, (c) had a full methods section, and (d) examined a health intervention or clinical treatment effect. A multivariate regression was conducted to determine the association between citation density and impact factor and 6 predictor variables of interest. Results: We found 1218 overviews published from 2000 to 2020; the majority (73%) of which were published in the most recent 5-year period (2016-2020). We extracted a selection of these overviews (n=541; 44%) dated from 2000 to 2018. The 541 overviews were published in 307 journals; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (8%), PLOS ONE (3%) and the Sao Paulo Medical Journal (2%) being the most prevalent. The majority of overviews (70%) were published in journals with impact factors between 0.05 and 3.97. The average citation rate was 90 (SD ±219.7) over 9 years, or 10 citations per overview per year. In multivariate analysis, overviews with a high number of citations and high journal impact factors tended to have more authors, larger sample sizes, be open access and report funding source. Conclusions: We found an 8 fold increase in the number of overviews from 2009 to 2020; and a representation of one published a day in 2020. Factors driving the increase in overviews include the exponential increase in the number of systematic reviews, the publication of Cochrane guidance on overview of reviews in 2009 and the subsequent publication of the first Cochrane overview in the same year. Our study found a significantly higher mean citation count of 10 overviews per year, published in journals with a mean impact factor of 4.4. These data indicate that, overall, overviews perform above average for the journals in which they publish. We also found that highly cited overviews in high impact factor journals had group authorship, large sample sizes, were openly accessible, and reported funding source.


Geophysics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 3MA-17MA ◽  
Author(s):  
Markku Peltoniemi

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 497-505
Author(s):  
Meredith E Thomley ◽  
Ana Preda-Naumescu ◽  
Carter J Boyd ◽  
Tiffany Mayo

Background: Standard bibliometric methods used in dermatologic research include impact factor and citations. The Altmetric score is an adjunctive measure of article impact. Objectives: The purpose of this study is to examine the breadth of societal impact made by scientific articles in dermatology and investigate a correlation between an article’s impact factor and citations, with its Altmetric score. Methods: We reviewed 15 dermatology journals with the highest impact factors and analyzed the 10 most cited articles from 2013 and 2016 within those journals. We studied the articles’ Altmetric scores, number of citations, and social media mentions. Using Microsoft Excel, we performed statistical analysis with Pearson correlation coefficients and descriptive statistics. Results: Analysis revealed a significant positive relationship between citation count and Altmetric scores for articles published in 2013 (p=0.0009) and 2016 (p=0.003). Impact factor was also significantly associated with Altmetric scores across both years (p=0.002, p=0.0005). Conclusions: Altmetric score weakly corresponded with citation count and journal impact factor across cohorts. We conclude that Altmetric scores serve as an additional measurement of article impact in dermatology, though they are insufficient as a replacement for traditional measures at this time.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley Wallace ◽  
Fabia Schuepbach ◽  
Stefan Gaukel ◽  
Ahmed I. Marwan ◽  
Ralph F. Staerkle ◽  
...  

Anastomotic leakage reflects a major problem in visceral surgery, leading to increased morbidity, mortality, and costs. This review is aimed at evaluating and summarizing risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leakage. A generalized discussion first introduces risk factors beginning with nonalterable factors. Focus is then brought to alterable impact factors on colorectal anastomoses, utilizing Cochrane systematic reviews assessed via systemic literature search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Medline until May 2019. Seventeen meta-anaylses covering 20 factors were identified. Thereof, 7 factors were preoperative, 10 intraoperative, and 3 postoperative. Three factors significantly reduced the incidence of anastomotic leaks: high (versus low) surgeon’s operative volume (RR=0.68), stapled (versus handsewn) ileocolic anastomosis (RR=0.41), and a diverting ostomy in anterior resection for rectal carcinoma (RR=0.32). Discussion of all alterable factors is made in the setting of the pre-, intra-, and postoperative influencers, with the only significant preoperative risk modifier being a high colorectal volume surgeon and the only significant intraoperative factors being utilizing staples in ileocolic anastomoses and a diverting ostomy in rectal anastomoses. There were no measured postoperative alterable factors affecting anastomotic integrity.


2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Günter Krampen ◽  
Thomas Huckert ◽  
Gabriel Schui

Exemplary for other than English-language psychology journals, the impact of recent Anglicization of five former German-language psychology journals on (1) authorship (nationality, i.e., native language, and number of authors, i.e., single or multiple authorships), (2) formal characteristics of the journal (number of articles per volume and length of articles), and (3) number of citations of the articles in other journal articles, the language of the citing publications, and the impact factors (IF) is analyzed. Scientometric data on these variables are gathered for all articles published in the four years before anglicizing and in the four years after anglicizing the same journal. Results reveal rather quick changes: Citations per year since original articles’ publication increase significantly, and the IF of the journals go up markedly. Frequencies of citing in German-language journals decrease, citing in English-language journals increase significantly after the Anglicization of former German-language psychology journals, and there is a general trend of increasing citations in other languages as well. Side effects of anglicizing former German-language psychology journals include the publication of shorter papers, their availability to a more international authorship, and a slight, but significant increase in multiple authorships.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dave L Dixon ◽  
William L Baker

BACKGROUND The impact and quality of a faculty members publications is a key factor in promotion and tenure decisions and career advancement. Traditional measures, including citation counts and journal impact factor, have notable limitations. Since 2010, alternative metrics have been proposed as another means of assessing the impact and quality of scholarly work. The Altmetric Attention Score is an objective score frequently used to determine the immediate reach of a published work across the web, including news outlets, blogs, social media, and more. Several studies evaluating the correlation between the Altmetric Attention Score and number of citations have found mixed results and may be discipline-specific. OBJECTIVE To determine the correlation between higher Altmetric Attention Scores and citation count for journal articles published in major pharmacy journals. METHODS This cross-sectional study evaluated articles from major pharmacy journals ranked in the top 10% according to the Altmetric Attention Score. Sources of attention that determined the Altmetric Attention Score were obtained, as well each articles open access status, article type, study design, and topic. Correlation between journal characteristics, including the Altmetric Attention Score and number of citations, was assessed using the Spearman’s correlation test. A Kruskal-Wallis 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the Altmetric Attention Scores between journals. RESULTS Six major pharmacy journals were identified. A total of 1,376 articles were published in 2017 and 137 of these represented the top 10% with the highest Altmetric Attention Scores. The median Altmetric Attention Score was 19 (IQR 15-28). Twitter and Mendeley were the most common sources of attention. Over half (56.2%) of the articles were original investigations and 49.8% were either cross-sectional, qualitative, or cohort studies. No significant correlation was found between the Altmetric Attention Score and citation count (rs=0.07, P = 0.485). Mendeley was the only attention source that correlated with the number of citations (rs=0.486, P<0.001). The median Altmetric Attention Score varied widely between each journal (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS The overall median Altmetric Attention score of 19 suggests articles published in major pharmacy journals are near the top 5% of all scientific output. However, we found no correlation between the Altmetric Attention Score and number of citations for articles published in major pharmacy journals in the year 2017.


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinde Li ◽  
Wenyan Sun ◽  
Jie Lu ◽  
Yuwei He ◽  
Ying Chen ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To investigate the incidence and potential risk factors for development of fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity in gout patients. Methods A total of 983 gout patients on fenofibrate treatment who visited the dedicated Gout Clinic at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between September 2016 and June 2020 were retrospectively enrolled from the electronic records system. Fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity was defined as an increase in serum creatinine (SCr) ≥0.3 mg/dl within 6 months of fenofibrate initiation. The change trend of SCr and uric acid levels during the treatment period were assessed by a generalised additive mixed model (GAMM). Multivariate analysis was performed for risk factors affecting elevated SCr. Results A total of 100 (10.2%) patients experienced an increase in SCr ≥0.3 mg/dl within 6 months after fenofibrate initiation. The median change of SCr in the whole cohort was 0.11 mg/dl [interquartile range (IQR) 0.03–0.20], whereas it was 0.36 (0.33–0.45) in the fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity group. In a multivariable regression model, chronic kidney disease (CKD) [odds ratio (OR) 2.39 (95% CI 1.48, 3.86)] and tophus [OR 2.29 (95% CI 1.39, 3.78)] were identified to be risk predictors, independent of measured covariates, of fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity. During the treatment period, although SCr temporarily increased, serum urate and triglyceride concentrations decreased using the interaction analysis of GAMM. Of those with fenofibrate withdrawal records, the SCr increase in 65% of patients was reversed after an average of 49 days off the drug. Conclusions This observational study implied that fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity occurs frequently in gout patients, especially in patients with tophi or CKD. The potential renal risks of fenofibrate usage in gout needs additional research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (13) ◽  
pp. 2820
Author(s):  
Serena Langella ◽  
Nadia Russolillo ◽  
Paolo Ossola ◽  
Andrea-Pierre Luzzi ◽  
Michele Casella ◽  
...  

(1) Background: Tumor recurrence after liver resection (LR) for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is common. Repeat liver resection (RLR) for recurrent ICC results in good survival outcomes in selected patients. The aim of this study was to investigate factors affecting the chance of resectability of recurrent ICC. (2) Methods: LR for ICC performed between January 2001 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who had undergone first LR were considered for the study. Data on recurrences were analyzed. A logistic regression model was used for multivariable analysis of factors related to RLR rate. (3) Results: In total, 140 patients underwent LR for ICC. Major/extended hepatectomies were required in 105 (75%) cases. The 90-day mortality was 5.7%, Clavien–Dindo grade 3, 4 complications were 9.3%, N+ disease was observed in 32.5%, and the median OS was 38.3 months. Recurrence occurred in 91 patients (65%). The site of relapse was the liver in 53 patients (58.2%). RLR was performed in 21 (39.6%) patients. Factors that negatively affected RLR were time to recurrence ≤12 months (OR 7.4, 95% CI 1.68–33.16, p = 0.008) and major hepatectomy (OR 16.7, 95% CI 3.8–73.78, p < 0.001) at first treatment. Survival after recurrence was better in patients who underwent RLR as compared with not resected patients (31 vs. 13.2 months, p = 0.02). (4) Conclusions: Patients with ICC treated at first resection with major hepatectomy and those who recurred in ≤12 months had significantly lower probability to receive a second resection for recurrence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 249
Author(s):  
Irene Dogliotti ◽  
Simone Ragaini ◽  
Francesco Vassallo ◽  
Elia Boccellato ◽  
Gabriele De Luca ◽  
...  

Background. Bendamustine is a cytotoxic alkylating drug with a broad range of indications as a single agent or in combination therapy in lymphoid neoplasia patients. However, its tolerability in elderly patients is still debated. Methods: An observational, retrospective study was carried out; patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or lymphoma, aged ≥ 65 years old, treated with bendamustine-based regimens in first or subsequent lines between 2010 and 2020 were considered eligible. Results: Overall, 179 patients aged ≥ 65 years were enrolled, 53% between 71 and 79 years old. Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) comorbidity score was ≥6 in 54% patients. Overall survival (OS) at 12 months was 95% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 90–97%); after a median follow up of 50 months, median OS was 84 months. The overall response rate was 87%, with 56% complete responses; the median time to progression (TTP) was 61 months. The baseline factors affecting OS by multivariable analysis were sex, histological diagnosis, renal function, and planned bendamustine dose, while only type of lymphoma and bendamustine dose impacted on TTP. Main adverse events were neutropenia (grade ≥ 3: 43%) and infections (any grade: 36%), with 17% of patients requiring hospital admission. Conclusions: The responses to bendamustine, as well as survival, are relevant even in advanced age patients, with a manageable incidence of acute toxicity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document