Extinction by citation deficiency: are botany journals at risk?

PurposeWith the current dynamics of scientific publishing increasingly driven by citation metrics, it is quite possible this will lead to the loss of some lower-ranked journals as they will be undervalued by authors, research institutions and research funders. This has been specifically predicted for natural science journals, but the efforts of editors of such journals to improve reputation have not been quantitatively assessed. This research aimed to fill this knowledge gap and assess the potential vulnerability of lower-ranked botany journals.Design/methodology/approachChanges in article citation rates since 2009 for 21 lower-ranked general botany journals were examined by least squares linear regression and factors potentially predictive of higher citation potential by principal component analysis. The findings were then examined in a case study of the publishing that followed the celebrated discovery of a living-fossil plant (Wollemia nobilis) in the mid-1990s.FindingsArticle citation rates steadily declined across most of these 21 journals over the period, and if submissions had been favoured (directly or indirectly) for citation potential, this appears to have been an ineffective, perhaps even a flawed, endeavour. Analysis of quantifiable article attributes across a subset of these journals revealed inconsistent relationships with no predictive value for citation potential. The case study clearly highlighted some processes contributing to declining citation rates and the value of botanical reporting well beyond that indicated by citation metrics.Research limitations/implicationsIt is not possible to know how important prediction of citation potential (directly or indirectly) is when journal editors accept papers for review or publication (such information is not made public, and this might not be a formalised process), so this study is only based what is considered (by the author) to be a reasonable assumption that all journals aim to improve their reputation and use citation metrics as one determinant of this.Social implicationsUnless we give value to lower-ranked regional botany journals in other ways than citations, the current trends in citation rates could lead to the diminution, even loss, of their valuable contribution biodiversity conservation.Originality/valueAlthough concerns have been expressed about the long-term viability of natural history journals, this is the first research to examine this quantitatively using citation metrics.

FinTech Companies: A Bibliometric Analysis

The financial-technology industry has recently attracted the attention of many sectors. The financial-technology industry designs new and unusual technological financial services in many areas. It combines technology with finance and provides an alternative to the traditional financial system. In the scope of this study, 636 publications were obtained from Scopus. Various tools, such as Microsoft Excel for frequency analysis, and VOSviewer for data visualization, were used. The open-source codes used for bibliometric analysis through the R Studio program were developed by the authors and used for citation-metrics analysis. The main aim of this study was to find out the most influential studies and authors and to reveal the distributions and impacts of publications in the FinTech area between 2015 and 2021 from the Scopus database. The results indicate that the most influential journal is Sustainability Switzerland, and the most cited author is Gomber et al. Additionally, Rabbani has the most publications, while China has emerged as the most productive country. On the other hand, this study found that FinTech research clustered in four areas. These areas are computer science, business management, economics, and social sciences. This FinTech study examines financial services, financial access, and financial technology, where FinTech is at the center. It also focuses on cryptocurrency, bitcoin, and smart contracts where the blockchain is at the center. The results reveal a systematic map of existing studies. Further, the study plays a guiding role in future research.

Scholar Metrics Scraper (SMS): automated retrieval of citation and author data

Academic departments, research clusters and evaluators analyze author and citation data to measure research impact and to support strategic planning. We created a tool, Scholar Metrics Scraper (SMS), to automate the retrieval of this bibliometric data for our research team. The project contains Jupyter notebooks (publicly-shared here) that take a list of researchers as an input to export a CSV file of citation metrics from Google Scholar and figures to visualize the group's impact. SMS is a scalable, open and publicly-accessible solution for automating the retrieval of citation data over time for a group of researchers.

EP.WE.372Has COVID-19 affected the attention surgical papers are receiving?

Aim Unsurprisingly, much of the medical profession has focussed on treating covid-19 over the past year often to the detriment of other pathologies. Engagement with academic literature may follow a similar trend; this paper used standard social media attention and citations metrices to assess whether the pandemic has affected engagement with surgical literature. Method Twitter Mentions and Mendeley Readers Data were retrieved for all papers published in Annals of Surgery, BJS and JAMASurgery between January 2019 and October 2020. The non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare Twitter Mentions and Mendeley Readers for COVID surgical vs non-COVID surgical publications (in 2020) and all surgical papers published before and after the advent of COVID-19. A control database of all papers published in NEJM, BMJ and Lancet over the same period of time was also created. Results There was no difference in Twitter mentions between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 papers (p-value 0.604); however there were significantly more Mendeley readers of COVID-19 papers than non-COVID-19 papers in 2020 (55 vs 5 median readers, p < 0.001). Surgical papers published in 2020 received significantly fewer Twitter mentions than those published in 2019 (15.5 vs 27, p < 0.001). Analysis of the non-surgical control dataset revealed the opposite trend; papers published in 2020 received significantly more attention than those published in 2019 (39 vs 30 median Twitter citations, p < 0.001). Conclusion Surgical papers published during the COVID-19 pandemic received significantly fewer social media mentions. Such reduced visibility has the potential to affect future citation metrics and dissemination of surgical knowledge

EP.TU.157Can Twitter Attention Predict Citation Metrics? A Machine Learning Aided Analysis

Aims Surgical journals have developed social media profiles to increase engagement though it remains unclear as to whether social media attention indices for publications act as a surrogate or predictor of traditional citation metrics. This study used machine learning to determine if there is a relationship between Twitter mentions and number of citations for surgical publications. Methods We identified all original research and review papers published in Annals of Surgery, BJS and JAMA Surgery in 2019. Citations data and Twitter mentions were retrieved and the Spearman rank coefficient was used to determine degree of correlation between the two variables. An unsupervised machine-learning hierarchical clustering algorithm was used to define clusters of outlying papers. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the clusters was completed. Results 413 papers were selected. Median number of citations was 7 (IQR 3-14), median number of Twitter mentions was 40 (IQR 15-79). No correlation between Twitter mentions and number of citations was observed (Spearman’s rho 0.076 p-value 0.124). Cluster analysis identified one large (cluster 2, 367/413 papers) and six small clusters. Analysis of cluster 2 revealed a weak but significant correlation between citations and Twitter mentions (Spearman’s rho 0.107 p-value 0.041). The remaining six clusters were characterised by an out of proportion number of Twitter mentions compared to citations or vice versa. Conclusions Twitter mentions should not be used as a surrogate or predictor of traditional citation metrics. In our database the relationship between social media attention and citations was skewed by a small number of outlying papers.

Evidence-Based Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Silver Diamine Fluoride Use in Dentistry

Background. This bibliometric analysis is aimed at reviewing the research pattern on the use of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) in dentistry using various citation metrics. Methods. A well-curated search was conducted on Elsevier’s Scopus database for the relevant literature on SDF published between 1969 and 2021. Bibliographic information such as information related to citations, bibliographic data, abstracts, keywords, and other relevant information was extracted using different combinations of keywords (“silver diamine fluoride” OR “Silver Diamine Fluorides” OR “Diamine Fluoride” OR “Silver Fluoride”). Analysis and visualization of the selected documents and related data were performed using various tools and software including MS Excel, MS Access, Bibexcel, VOS viewer, Biblioshiny, and Gephi. VOS Viewer was utilized for the Graph Modeling Language (GML) to generate graphical representations of the data. Furthermore, network graphs were generated to assess the various associations between research themes, countries, organizations, authors, journals, and citations. Results. The initial search yielded 662 documents, of which 410 were chosen for analysis. 252 records were deemed irrelevant. The chosen records consisted of journal articles ( n = 351 ), conference papers ( n = 14 ), book chapters ( n = 1 ), and review articles ( n = 44 ). The results showed that there was an upward trend in the research on SDF, and a substantial increase was observed in the citation index after 2014. Researchers from the United States of America, Hong Kong, and Japan were the top contributors, with organizations and authors from the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, leading the way in citations and productivity. Conclusion. The bibliometric analysis provides valuable information regarding the total number of publications on SDF and their citation details. It also identifies the leading countries and organizations involved in the research on SDF and provides a comprehensive analysis of the research trends related to SDF.

Dedicated COVID-19 Resource Center in Radiology Journals: Its Citation Metrics and Altmetrics Impact

Background: Since the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), several journals established dedicated resource center for all articles published on COVID-19. Our study compared the altmetric impact captured by articles published in journals having such COVID-19 resource center. Methods: We used Web of Science database to assess radiology journals publishing most common articles on COVID-19. We used Dimensions database to assess citations received and altmetric attention score for each article. For each article, we extracted number of citation received and altmetric attention score. To account for the the variation in strength and exposure between included journals, we adopted a normalization strategy and we used regression analysis in our statistical analysis. Results: A total of 494 articles included in the current assessment, including 334 (67.6%) articles published in journals with dedicated COVID-19 resource center including European radiology, American Journal of Roentgenology, Radiology, and Journal of the American college of radiology, while European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Academic Radiology did not have COVID-19 resource center. Journals with COVID-19 resource center had a mean normalized altmetric attention score of 0.38 higher (95% CI 0.25 to 0.50; p< 0.001) and a mean normalized citation count of 6.73 higher (95% CI 3.99 to 9.48; p< 0.001) than those without COVID-19 resource center. Conclusion: Radiology journals that provided COVID-19 articles in a dedicated resource center within its homepage had higher attention and citation for their COVID-19 articles compared to journals that did not have such dedicated resource center.

The value of research funding for knowledge creation and dissemination: A study of SNSF Research Grants

This study investigates the effect of competitive project funding on researchers’ publication outputs. Using detailed information on applicants at the Swiss National Science Foundation and their proposal evaluations, we employ a case-control design that accounts for individual heterogeneity of researchers and selection into treatment (e.g. funding). We estimate the impact of the grant award on a set of output indicators measuring the creation of new research results (the number of peer-reviewed articles), its relevance (number of citations and relative citation ratios), as well as its accessibility and dissemination as measured by the publication of preprints and by altmetrics. The results show that the funding program facilitates the publication and dissemination of additional research amounting to about one additional article in each of the three years following the funding. The higher citation metrics and altmetrics by funded researchers suggest that impact goes beyond quantity and that funding fosters dissemination and quality.

Association Between Twitter Mentions and Academic Citations in Otolaryngology Literature

Objective To evaluate the relationship between Twitter mentions and academic citations in otolaryngology literature. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Setting Altmetric Twitter mention and Google Scholar citation rosters. Methods Original research articles from 10 leading otolaryngology journals were assessed 26 months after print publication. Article Twitter mentions were tracked through the Altmetric Bookmarklet, and article citation data were determined through the Google Scholar search engine. Twitter mentions and citation metrics of articles were compared through 2-tailed t test analysis ( P < .05). Results Of all articles, 50.7% (152/300) had at least 1 Twitter mention. Of all article Twitter mentions, 25% (432/1758) happened within the first week of online publication dates, while 64% (1130/1758) occurred between online and print publication dates. Articles mentioned on Twitter had 1.6-fold more Google Scholar citations (8.6 ± 0.7, mean ± SD) than articles with no Twitter mentions (5.4 ± 0.4, P < .01). A total of 8% (24/300) of publications were tweeted by their authors. Articles self-tweeted by authors were associated with an 8.4-citation increase (14.8 ± 3.1) for Google Scholar when compared with articles not shared by their authors on Twitter (6.4 ± 0.4; 2.3-fold increase, P < .01). Conclusion Most otolaryngology articles are disseminated over Twitter, with greatest Twitter activity occurring before print publication date of articles. Citations within 2 years of release are positively associated with the number of mentions on Twitter. Article Twitter mentions may augment the academic influence of otolaryngology publications.