Passing the torch: A look back at our editorship (original) (raw)
Related papers
Bibliometric analysis of the top-cited gastroenterology and hepatology articles
BMJ Open, 2016
Objective: To identify the top-cited articles in gastroenterology and hepatology, and analyse their characteristics. Methods: Two searches were conducted in the Science Citation Index Expanded database; a search of 69 journals under the category 'Gastroenterology and Hepatology' (list A) and a keyword search of all journals (list B). The search results were analysed and the inter-rater coefficient of agreement between evaluators was measured using Cohen κ. Results: The number of citations varied from 1049 to 2959 in list A and from 1929 to 5500 in list B. In both lists, the majority of articles were research papers. No significant correlations were found between the number of citations and the number of years since publication (R 2 =0.00992, p=0.473 and R 2 =0.00202, p=0.757, respectively). However, the mean number of citations of papers published before the year 2000 was lower than those published after 2000 (36.70±19.31 vs 106.03±39.22). No correlation was found between number of authors and the number of citations (R 2 =0.04352, p=0.130), but strong correlations were found between the number of institutes involved or number of countries and the number of citations (R 2 =0.275, p<0.001 and R 2 =0.16181, p=0.003, respectively). Females were under-represented in authorship (45 vs 254, p=0.004). Only 21 papers (of 54) in list A were supported by grants. No correlation was found between number of grants received and the number of citations (R 2 =0.02573, p=0.247). The interrater agreement between evaluators had a Cohen κ coefficient 0.76-0.84. Conclusions: Top-cited articles were not only published in highly ranked journals specialising in Gastroenterology and Hepatology but also in 14 journals not specialised in this field. The number of citations correlated with the number of institutes and the number of countries involved but not with the number of grants received or the number of authors. Females were under-represented in the authorship.
F1000Research, 2013
Reports have suggested that academic medicine may be in Background: decline within the UK. Further evidence suggests that rates of subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at major scientific meetings are low and may be declining. We have compared the publication rates of abstracts presented at meetings of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) between 1995 and 2005 and examined factors associated with full paper publication. Abstracts presented at BSG meetings in 1995 and 2005 were Methods: assessed by cross-referencing with multiple databases. Abstract characteristics associated with publication were analysed. There were no differences in overall publication rates, impact Results: factors or time to publication between 1995 and 2005. Overall, basic-science abstracts were twice as likely to achieve full publication than non-basic science. There was a significant fall in the publication rates for case series and audits, and significantly increased rates for fundamental/basic-science abstracts over the study period. There were non-significant increases in publication rates for controlled trials and systematic reviews. In general, publication rates for all predominantly clinically orientated abstracts reduced between the two periods with the most notable fall occurring in nutrition. There was no evidence of a decline in overall abstract Conclusions: publication rates between 1995 and 2005. There seemed to be trend for increased publication rates of abstracts using perceived high-quality study methodologies with a corresponding decrease in those with lower quality methods. The proportion of basic-science abstracts is likely to be a determinant of overall full publication rates following scientific meetings.
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, 2001
To investigate the views of North American and European anesthesiologists on the value of the impact factor (IF). M Me et th ho od d: : Four hundred thirty-eight anesthesiologists in Canada, the United States of America (USA), and Europe were polled about the importance of the IF regarding hiring, promotions, funding of research and to express their personal views. R Re es su ul lt ts s: : IF of a candidates publications is a criterion in 38% of academic appointments in Canada and USA vs 81% in Europe (P <0.0001). The importance of IF to obtain funding is greater in Europe (46%) than in North America (17%) (P <0.0001). Twentythree percent and 50% of Canadian and American anesthesiologists respectively believe that IF affects financial support (P=0.0389). European anesthesiologists value the IF more than the North Americans (67% vs 31%, P <0.0001). Forty-five percent, 67%, and 56% of the Canadian, American and European anesthesiologists respectively estimate that IF reflects journal quality. Sixtyfour percent of anesthesiologists in North America vs 81% in Europe (P=0.0175) pursue to publish in high IF journals. Eighty-six percent, 85% and 90% of the Canadian, American and European anesthesiologists believe that the IF of a journal can be manipulated. Finally, 79%, 67%, and 81% of the Canadian, American, and European anesthesiologists believe that IF should be improved but 33%, 35%, and 30% believe that it should be abandoned. C Co on nc cl lu us si io on ns s: : IF for academic appointments and funding is more important in Europe than in North America. More than 50% of anesthesiologists agree that IF needs to be improved. O Ob bj je ec ct ti if f : : Obtenir lopinion des anesthésiologistes nord-américains et européens sur la valeur du facteur dimpact (FI). M Mé ét th ho od de e : : Quatre cent trente-huit anesthésiologistes du Canada, des États-Unis et dEurope ont répondu à un sondage sur limportance du FI en regard de lembauche, des promotions, du financement de la recherche et de leurs opinions personnelles. R Ré és su ul lt ta at ts s : : Le FI des publications dun candidat sert de critère dans 38 % des nominations au Canada et aux É-U vs 81 % en Europe (P < 0,0001). Limportance du FI pour lobtention de financement est plus marquée en Europe (46 %) quen Amérique du Nord (17 %) (P < 0,0001). Vingt-trois pour cent et 50 % des anesthésiologistes canadiens et américains, respectivement, croient que le FI influence le soutien financier (P = 0,0389). Les anesthésiologistes européens accordent plus de valeur au FI que les nord-américains (67 % vs 31 %, P < 0,0001). Quarante-cinq pour cent, 67 % et 56 % des anesthésiologistes canadiens, américains et européens, respectivement, estiment que le FI reflète la qualité de la revue. Soixante-quatre pour cent des anesthésiologistes dAmérique du Nord vs 81 % dEurope (P = 0,0175) cherchent à publier dans des revues à FI important. Quatrevingt-six pour cent, 85 % et 90 % des anesthésiologistes canadiens, américains et européens croient que le FI dune revue peut être manipulée. Enfin, 79 %, 67 % et 81 % des anesthésiologistes canadiens, américains et européens pensent que le FI devrait être amélioré, mais 33 %, 35 % et 30 % voudraient quon labandonne. C Co on nc cl lu us si io on ns s : : Le FI est plus important en Europe quen Amérique du Nord quant aux nominations universitaires et au financement de la recherche. Plus de 50 % des anesthésiologistes pensent que le FI devrait être amélioré.
Journal of The American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2008
AC-IE), one of the prime chemistry journals worldwide, and conducted a citation analysis for Communications that were accepted by the journal (n = 878) or rejected but published elsewhere (n = 959). The results of negative binomial-regression models show that holding all other model variables constant, being accepted by AC-IE increases the expected number of citations by up to 50%. A comparison of average citation counts (with 95% confidence intervals) of accepted and rejected (but published elsewhere) Communications with international scientific reference standards was undertaken. As reference standards, (a) mean citation counts for the journal set provided by Thomson Reuters corresponding to the field "chemistry" and (b) specific reference standards that refer to the subject areas of Chemical Abstracts were used. When compared to reference standards, the mean impact on chemical research is for the most part far above average not only for accepted Communications but also for rejected (but published elsewhere) Communications. However, average and below-average scientific impact is to be expected significantly less frequently for accepted Communications than for rejected Communications. All in all, the results of this study confirm that peer review at AC-IE is able to select the "best" scientific work with the highest impact on chemical research.
Gastroenterology and Hepatology Research Output in the 20th Century - A Bibliometric Study
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Research, 2019
hepatology research in each year, its open access status and countries and journals the research is published in. METHODS: We used Web of Science database to search for articles and reviews published in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology in the years from January 1 st , 2000 to December 31 st , 2018. Among the variables we assessed, yearly trend, open access publications, countries, journals, and top cited articles. RESULTS: A total of 203,438 publications were retrieved by our search, of which 66,164 (32.5%) were open access publications. The yearly trend in total publication output showed a steady increase till 2015, followed by a steady decline. For country analyses, Japan has emerged to be the 2 nd highest country with research output in gastroenterology and hepatology. World Journal of gastroenterology remained to be the highest publishing journal in this field. CONCLUSION: The gastroenterology and hepatology field is rapidly expanding during the last two decades. This study provided an overall assessment of this field, taking the advantage of the advanced field indexing service by Web of Science database.