АНАЛІЗ ЗАРУБІЖНИХ ВИДАНЬ ІЗ ПИТАНЬ МЕНЕДЖМЕНТУ, УПРАВЛІННЯ ОСВІТОЮ ТА ПЕДАГОГІКИ, ПРЕДСТАВЛЕНИХ У НАУКОМЕТРИЧНІЙ БАЗІ WEB OF SCIENCE ЗА ІНДЕКСОМ ЦИТУВАННЯ IMPACT FACTOR

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (24) ◽  
pp. 154-161
Author(s):  
Євген ІВАНОВ
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Web Of Science

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 Ckj consolidation among Q1 Urology and Nephrology journals

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 723-727
Author(s):  
Alberto Ortiz
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Cost Efficiency ◽  
Journal Impact Factor ◽  
Outcome Prediction ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Sglt2 Inhibitors ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact

Abstract The Clinical Kidney Journal (ckj) impact factor from Clarivate’s Web of Science for 2019 was 3.388. This consolidates ckj among journals in the top 25% (first quartile, Q1) in the Urology and Nephrology field according to the journal impact factor. The manuscripts contributing the most to the impact factor focused on chronic kidney disease (CKD) epidemiology and evaluation, CKD complications and their management, cost-efficiency of renal replacement therapy, pathogenesis of CKD, familial kidney disease and the environment–genetics interface, onconephrology, technology, SGLT2 inhibitors and outcome prediction. We provide here an overview of the hottest and most impactful topics for 2017–19.

scholarly journals Analysis of Retractions from Hospitals in Mainland China from 2017-2019

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tianye Zhao ◽  
Tiancong Dai ◽  
Zhijun Lun ◽  
Yanli Gao
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
High Impact Factor ◽  
Data Manipulation

Abstract Objective: The aim of this study is to analyze the features of retractions from hospitals in mainland China, and to discuss the causes of research misconduct by Chinese doctors.Research Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Retraction Watch Database were searched to collect eligible records and to extract characteristics of the included entries, including publishers and Open Access status of the journals involved, ORCID, PubPeer comments before the retraction, whether there are authors from Grade A, Third-class hospitals, and whether there are response or requirements from authors.Results: 521 retractions were included. Retractions were found primarily from authors of grade A, third-class hospitals, a limited regions, and published in journals with medium and high impact factor. The main reasons for retractions were Data Manipulation/Fabrication/Fraud(27.1%), Error by Author(19.9%), Plagiarism(16.7%), Self-Plagiarism(9.1%), Fake Peer Review(7.6%) and Forged Authorship(6.3%). Most of the retracted publications have neither ORCID nor PubPeer comments before their retraction.Conclusion: This is the first report focus on the retractions from hospitals in mainland China. The large number of retractions from Chinese hospitals in recent years is worrying. The results suggests that some retractions are related to third-parties. Some features of retractions are centralized, and it is difficult to evaluate the role of ORCID and PubPeer in the retractions during this period.

Research Productivity from Asia in Parkinson’s Disease

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-35
Author(s):  
Dimple Gopi ◽  
B. Asha
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Microsoft Excel ◽  
Limited Access ◽  
Isi Web Of Science

The paper analyses the literature produced in Parkinson’s research during the last decade (2008-2017) from the Asian countries using scientometric methods. The data was taken from the ISI Web of Science. Using Microsoft excel the data was analyzed. There was no correlation between productivity and impact factor. Though China is found to be ahead of all Asian countries in productivity, its impact factor is less than Japan and Israel. Open access articles were cited more than limited access articles.

scholarly journals Global psychology: a bibliometric analysis of Web of Science publications

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 553-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Navarrete-Cortés ◽  
Juan Antonio Fernández-López ◽  
Alfonso López-Baena ◽  
Raúl Quevedo-Blasco ◽  
Gualberto Buela-Casal
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Journal Citation Report ◽  
Scientific Production ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
Latin American Spanish ◽  
American Spanish ◽  
The Web

In this study, we carried a classification by country based on the analysis of the scientific production of psychology journals. We analyzed a total of 108,741 documents, published in the Web of Science. The indicators used were the Weighted Impact Factor, the Relative Impact Factor, the Citation Rate per article and the articles published in the top five journals of the Journal Citation Report (JCR). The results indicate that Spain has the highest percentage of articles in the top five journals in the JCR and Colombia is the second latin-american, Spanish-speaking country that has more citations per article. Countries like Hungary, Italy and USA, had a higher Impact Factor and Citation Rate.

scholarly journals Modeling and Prediction of the Impact Factor of Journals Using Open-Access Databases

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 35-58
Author(s):  
Matthias Templ
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Journal Impact Factor ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Functional Relationships ◽  
Modeling And Prediction ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact ◽  
The Web

This article is motivated by the work as editor-in-chief of the Austrian Journal of Statistics and contains detailed analyses about the impact of the Austrian Journal of Statistics. The impact of a journal is typically expressed by journal metrics indicators. One of the important ones, the journal impact factor is calculated from the Web of Science (WoS) database by Clarivate Analytics. It is known that newly established journals or journals without membership in big publishers often face difficulties to be included, e.g., in the Science Citation Index (SCI) and thus they do not receive a WoS journal impact factor, as it is the case for example, for the Austrian Journal of Statistics. In this study, a novel approach is pursued modeling and predicting the WoS impact factor of journals using open access or partly open-access databases, like Google Scholar, ResearchGate, and Scopus. I hypothesize a functional linear dependency between citation counts in these databases and the journal impact factor. These functional relationships enable the development of a model that may allow estimating the impact factor for new, small, and independent journals not listed in SCI. However, only good results could be achieved with robust linear regression and well-chosen models. In addition, this study demonstrates that the WoS impact factor of SCI listed journals can be successfully estimated without using the Web of Science database and therefore the dependency of researchers and institutions to this popular database can be minimized. These results suggest that the statistical model developed here can be well applied to predict the WoS impact factor using alternative open-access databases. 

scholarly journals Scientific production of researchers in the Nutrition field with productivity fellowships from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 681-690
Author(s):  
Lucinéia de PINHO ◽  
Hercílio MARTELLI-JÚNIOR ◽  
Eduardo Araujo OLIVEIRA ◽  
Daniella Reis Barbosa MARTELLI
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Academic Advising ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Scientific Production ◽  
Southeastern Brazil ◽  
National Council ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Data Collation ◽  
Scientific And Technological Development

ABSTRACT Objective To characterize researchers in the Nutrition field awarded with Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico research productivity fellowships and evaluate their scientific production according to an analysis of curricula registered on the Lattes Platform. Methods The study is cross-sectional and descriptive in scope, and was developed from October 2014 to February 2015. The productivity fellowships/Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico researchers were identified from the Lattes Platform, and their curriculum lattes were downloaded for data collation. Information on the profiles of the researchers and the bibliometric data of productivity (published articles, articles and citations registered on ISI/Web of Science and Scopus databases, impact of the publications, and academic advising) were collected. Results Eighty researchers were identified and evaluated. A total of 67.5% were female and 53.5% were classified as category 2. Approximately two-thirds (65.0%) were located in Southeastern Brazil. The sum of articles published by the researchers from the beginning of their career until the end of the study came to 7,358 (median=84 per researcher, interquartile range=53–285). Of these publications, 45.0% were indexed in the Web of Science and 62.0% in Scopus. Of the journals where the articles were published, 70.0% had an impact factor. Conclusion Most publications were performed in journals with an impact factor, indicating the influence of Brazilian nutrition studies on society and their potential for guiding public policies on nutrition and health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document