Bibliometric evaluation of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia (2013-2022)

Abstract The Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, published since 1925, is the most influential dermatological journal in Latin America, indexed in the main international bibliographic databases, and occupies the 50th position among the 70 dermatological journals indexed in the Journal of Citations Reports, in 2022. In this article, the authors present a critical analysis of its trajectory in the last decade and compare its main bibliometric indices with Brazilian medical and international dermatological journals. The journal showed consistent growth in different bibliometric indices, which indicates a successful editorial policy and greater visibility in the international scientific community, attracting foreign authors. The increases in citations received (4.1 ×) and in the Article Influence Score (2.9×) were more prominent than those of the main Brazilian medical and international dermatological journals. The success of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia in the international scientific scenario depends on an assertive editorial policy, on promptly publication of high-quality articles, and on institutional stimulus to encourage clinical research in dermatology.

Significado de la indexación de la Revista Peruana de Ginecología y Obstetricia a Scopus

La Revista Peruana de Ginecología y Obstetricia (RPGO) ha obtenido su inclusión en la importante base de datos Scopus. En una rápida recopilación de la publicación de la revista, se recuerda la dedicación editorial de sus seis editores, cuatro de los cuales acababan de presidir la Sociedad Peruana de Obstetricia y Ginecología (SPOG). Los momentos iniciales de trabajo editorial fueron realizados manualmente, en máquinas de escribir y visitando la imprenta continuamente, así como a los patrocinadores. El compromiso de los Comités Directivos de SPOG para financiar la publicación y distribución de los ejemplares permitió la gradual indexación a bases de datos locales, regionales e internacionales. Su internalización se amplió desde la publicación de la RPGO en el Open Journal Systems (OJS), sistema informático donde se publica los artículos con puntualidad, calidad, incluyendo sus características editoriales y la Información para los Autores. Ahora la publicación es solo virtual, en español e inglés, con visibilidad e impacto de los artículos desde el inicio de la RPGO en 1955. Con datos actualizados del OJS sobre la RPGO, el número de visitas mensuales a los resúmenes llegan hasta 10 mil y las descargas mensuales de artículos en formato PDF hasta más de 9 mil. Y, en el ámbito de revistas científicas de ginecoobstetricia de América Latina y España en Scopus, destaca el índice h de la RPGO por Google Scholar Metrics, como una de las mejores. Al presente, y frente a los desafíos futuros, la actividad de la RPGO ha sido fortalecida, estableciendo un equipo editorial y herramientas que permiten la ya iniciada profesionalización de los procesos de la actividad editorial.

The Peruvian Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics (RPGO, for its acronym in Spanish) has obtained its inclusion in the important Scopus database. A quick review of the journal's publication recalls the editorial dedication of its six editors, four of whom had just recently chaired the Peruvian Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (SPOG, for its acronym in Spanish). The initial editorial work was carried out manually, on typewriters and continuously visiting the printing press, as well as the sponsors. The commitment of the SPOG Steering Committees to finance the publication and distribution of the issues allowed the gradual indexing to local, regional and international databases. Its internalization was expanded since the publication of the RPGO in the Open Journal Systems (OJS), a computer system where articles are published with punctuality, quality, including their editorial characteristics and the Information for Authors. Now the publication is only virtual, in English and Spanish, with visibility and impact of the articles since the beginning of the RPGO in 1955. With updated OJS data on the RPGO, the number of monthly visits to the abstracts reaches up to 10 thousand and monthly downloads of articles in PDF format reach more than 9 thousand. And, in the field of obstetrics and gynecology scientific journals in Latin America and Spain in Scopus, the h index of the RPGO by Google Scholar Metrics stands out as one of the best. At present, and facing future challenges, the activity of the RPGO has been strengthened, establishing an editorial team and tools that allow the already initiated professionalization of the processes of the editorial activity.

Métricas de impacto y evaluación de la ciencia / Impact metrics and science evaluation

RESUMEN Los científicos siempre buscaron formas de evaluar los resultados de las investigaciones para reconocer y premiar sus esfuerzos, y para apoyar decisiones en programas y políticas públicas. Las medidas o métricas de impacto de la ciencia se transformaron, en las últimas décadas, en el motor propulsor del ambiente académico. Investigadores, revistas científicas, bases de datos y casas editoriales, instituciones de investigación y agencias de financiación tienen su trabajo gobernado por el impacto de la investigación que producen, publican, indexan, promueven y financian. Se utilizan largamente indicadores bibliométricos para la evaluación de la producción científica, a pesar de la falta de relación inequívoca entre citas y calidad, impacto o mérito científico. Además, cuando se considera la innovación, característica inherente de la investigación científica, la relación es todavía más desconectada. En este artículo se describen los tipos principales de métricas utilizadas para evaluar la producción científica, sus características, potenciales y limitaciones.

ABSTRACT Scientists have always looked for ways to evaluate research results to recognize and reward their efforts, and to support decisions regarding programs and public policies. The metrics of scientific impact have become, in recent decades, the driving force behind the academic environment. The work of researchers, scientific journals, databases and publishers, research institutions, and funding agencies is driven by the impact of the research they produce, publish, index, promote and finance. Bibliometric indicators are widely used for the evaluation of scientific output, despite the lack of a clear relationship between citations and quality, impact, or scientific merit. Furthermore, the relationship is even less evident regarding innovation, which is an inherent characteristic of scientific research. This article describes the main types of metrics used to evaluate scientific output, as well as its features, potentials, and limitations.

A comparison of scientometric data and publication policies of ophthalmology journals

Purpose: This retrospective database analysis study aims to present the scientometric data of journals publishing in the field of ophthalmology and to compare the scientometric data of ophthalmology journals according to the open access (OA) publishing policies. Methods: The scientometric data of 48 journals were obtained from Clarivate Analytics InCites and Scimago Journal & Country Rank websites. Journal impact factor (JIF), Eigenfactor score (ES), scientific journal ranking (SJR), and Hirsch index (HI) were included. The OA publishing policies were separated into full OA with publishing fees, full OA without fees, and hybrid OA. The fees were stated as US dollars (USD). Results: Four scientometric indexes had strong positive correlations; the highest correlation coefficients were observed between the SJR and JIF (R = 0.906) and the SJR and HI (R = 0.798). However, journals in the first quartile according to JIF were in the second and third quartiles according to the SJR and HI and in the fourth quartile in the ES. The OA articles published in hybrid journals received a median of 1.17?fold (0.15–2.71) more citations. Only HI was higher in hybrid OA; other scientometric indexes were similar with full OA journals. Full OA journals charged a median of 1525 USD lower than hybrid journals. Conclusion: Full OA model in ophthalmology journals does not have a positive effect on the scientometric indexes. In hybrid OA journals, choosing to publish OA may increase citations, but it would be more accurate to evaluate this on a journal basis

Indicadores bibliométricos: impacto y altmetrics para una evaluación amplia y equitativa de las revistas científicas de Colombia / Bibliometrics Indicators: Impact and Altmetrics for an Extensive and Equitable Assessment of Colombian Scientific Journals / Indicadores bibliométricos: impacto e altmetria para uma avaliação ampla e equitativa das revistas científicas colombianas

La medición y análisis de la calidad de las publicaciones científicas es de fundamental importancia para evaluar el progreso e impacto de investigadores, grupos de investigación y revistas científicas en la comunidad académica y la sociedad (1,2). Tradicionalmente, la evaluación se encomendaba a pares de reconocida trayectoria, idoneidad y prestigio. Sin embargo, para eliminar subjetividades, desde hace varios años se ha recurrido a indicadores bibliométricos que propenden por una calificación mensurable, objetiva y multidimensional (1,3). Los indicadores bibliométricos (IB) pueden definirse como cuantificadores de información bibliográfica, disponible en documentos científicos y académicos, susceptible de ser analizada en términos de producción y consumo (1,2). Existe una variada tipología de IB (1,2) en función del objeto a examinar (investigador, revista o grupo de investigación) y que en algunos casos son transversales a este. Así, los indicadores personales (edad, sexo y antecedentes de los autores) solo aplican a investigadores o grupos, mientras que los de productividad e impacto aplican también a revistas. Para estas, el indicador de productividad (cantidad) y, aún más, el de impacto ("calidad") son rutinariamente empleados para clasificarlas y compararlas con el propósito, cada vez más controversial, de medir su pertinencia y relevancia académica y/o social (4).

Measuring and analyzing the quality of scientific publications is fundamentally important for assessing the progress and impact of researchers, research groups and scientific journals in the academic community and society (1,2). Traditionally, this assessment was entrusted to peers with a recognized track record, eligibility and prestige. However, bibliometric indicators have been used for several years to eliminate subjectivity, which aim at a measurable, objective and multi-dimensional qualification (1,3). Bibliometric indicators (BI) can be defined as quantifiers of the bibliographic information available in scientific and academic documents susceptible to being analyzed in terms of production and consumption (1,2). There is a typological variety of BI (1,2) based on the object to be examined (researcher, journal or research group) and, in some cases, they are cross-sectional to it. In this way, personal indicators (age, gender and background of the authors) only apply to researchers or groups, while productivity and impact also apply to journals. For journals, the productivity (quantity) and, more so, impact ("quality") indicators, are routinely used to classify journals and compare them, with the increasingly controversial purpose of measuring their academic and/or social pertinence and relevance (4).

A medição e análise da qualidade das publicações científicas é de fundamental importância para avaliar o progresso e o impacto de pesquisadores, grupos de pesquisa e revistas científicas na comunidade acadêmica e na sociedade (1,2). Tradicionalmente, a avaliação era confiada a pares de reconhecida trajetória, idoneidade e prestígio. No entanto, a fim de eliminar subjetividades, há vários anos são utilizados indicadores bibliométricos que visam uma qualificação mensurável, objetiva e multidimensional (1,3). Indicadores bibliométricos (IB) podem ser definidos como quantificadores de informações bibliográficas, disponíveis em documentos científicos e acadêmicos, passíveis de análise em termos de produção e consumo (1,2). Existe uma tipologia de IB variada (1,2) dependendo do objeto a ser examinado (pesquisador, periódico ou grupo de pesquisa) e que em alguns casos são transversais a ele. Assim, os indicadores pessoais (idade, sexo e formação dos autores) se aplicam apenas a pesquisadores ou grupos, enquanto os de produtividade e impacto também se aplicam a periódicos. Para estes, o indicador de produtividade (quantidade) e, mais ainda, o indicador de impacto ("qualidade") são rotineiramente utilizados para classificá-los e compará-los com o propósito cada vez mais controverso de medir sua pertinência e relevância acadêmica e/ou social (4).

Impacto social e acadêmico da Revista Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade / Social and academic impact of the Brazilian Journal of Family and Community Medicine / Impacto social y académico de la Revista Brasileña de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria

O fortalecimento da Medicina de Família e Comunidade e da atenção primária latino-americana requer, entre tantas outras coisas, a produção de periódicos científicos de alto impacto social e acadêmico. A Revista Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade tem o potencial de ser um desses periódicos. Contudo, é complexa a tarefa de gerenciar e aumentar o impacto social e acadêmico de periódicos científicos de pequeno porte, com métricas modestas e/ou ligadas a áreas de pesquisa emergentes, como no caso Revista Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade. Temos observado ao longo dos anos um aumento significativo do impacto científico dessa revista, a exemplo da elevação de seu Índice H5 (Google). Entretanto, ainda há muito trabalho à frente para alcançarmos indexações na Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Scopus e Web of Science. Este editorial é uma forma de mobilizar toda a comunidade acadêmica e assistencial em Medicina de Família e Comunidade e atenção primária a unir esforços para fortalecer a revista.

The strengthening of Family and Community Medicine and Primary Health Care in Latin America requires, among many other things, the production of scientific journals with high social and academic impact. The Brazilian Journal of Family and Community Medicine has the potential to be one of these journals. However, the task of managing and increasing the social and academic relevance of small journals, with modest metrics and/or linked to emerging research areas, as in the case of Brazilian Journal of Family and Community Medicine, is complex. Over the years, we have observed a significant increase in the scientific impact of this journal, such as the increase in its H5 Index (Google). However, there is still a lot of work ahead to achieve indexing in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science. This editorial is a way of mobilizing the entire academic and care communities in Family and Community Medicine and Primary Health Care to join efforts to strengthen the journal.

El fortalecimiento de la Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria y de la Atención Primaria de Salud en latinoamerica requiere, entre otras cosas, la producción de revistas científicas de alto impacto social y académico. La Revista Brasileña de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria tiene potencial para ser una de esas revistas. Sin embargo, la tarea de gestionar y aumentar el impacto social y académico de revistas científicas pequeñas, con métricas bibliométricas modestas y/o vinculadas a áreas de investigación emergentes, como en el caso de Revista Brasileña de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria, es compleja. A lo largo de los años, hemos observado un aumento significativo del impacto científico de esa Revista, como el aumento de su Índice H5 (Google). Pero aún queda mucho trabajo por delante para lograr la indexación en MEDLINE, Scopus y Web of Science. Ese editorial es una forma de movilizar a toda la comunidad académica y asistencial de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria y Atención Primaria de Salud a unir esfuerzos para fortalecer la revista.

Os periódicos médicos brasileiros referenciam artigos nacionais? Um estudo transversal / Do Brazilian medical journals reference Brazilian articles? A cross-sectional study

Resumo Contexto A produção científica brasileira cresce de forma quantitativa e qualitativa a cada década. Entretanto, há uma desvalorização dos periódicos brasileiros demonstrada através da baixa quantidade de citações em comparação a textos de revistas internacionais, com justificativa subentendida de que há superioridade qualitativa de artigos estrangeiros. Objetivos Verificar a diferença entre o número de citações de periódicos nacionais e internacionais em três revistas brasileiras no período de 2016 a 2020. Métodos Foram analisados todos os artigos publicados na Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, no Jornal Vascular Brasileiro e na Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira no intervalo de 2016 a 2020. Os estudos selecionados tiveram suas referências avaliadas, sendo contabilizado o número total de citações e se eram provenientes de periódicos brasileiros ou de periódicos estrangeiros. Resultados Foram analisados 902 artigos, totalizando 23.394 referências, com média de 25,81 ± 8,59 por artigo. Nesse contexto, 2.680 (11,45%) eram nacionais, correspondentes a uma média de 2,95 ± 3,79 referências brasileiras por artigo. Conclusões Faz-se necessária a maior valorização dos periódicos brasileiros, em especial por parte dos pesquisadores nacionais e das instituições responsáveis pelo fomento da ciência.

Abstract Background The quantity and quality of Brazilian scientific output increases decade by decade. However, there is a tendency to undervalue Brazilian journals, illustrated by the low number of citations compared with texts in international journals, with the tacit justification that foreign articles are of superior quality. Objectives To investigate the differences in numbers of citations of Brazilian and international periodicals in three Brazilian journals from 2016 to 2020. Methods All articles published in the Journal of the Brazilian College of Surgeons, in the Jornal Vascular Brasileiro, and in Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira from 2016 to 2020 were analyzed. The references of these studies were analyzed, summing the total number of citations and classifying them as published in Brazilian or foreign journals. Results A total of 902 articles were analyzed, totaling 23,394 references, with a mean of 25.81 ± 8.59 references per article. Of these, 2,680 (11.45%) were Brazilian, equating to a mean of 2.95 ± 3.79 Brazilian references per article. Conclusions It is necessary to improve appreciation of Brazilian periodicals, especially among Brazilian researchers and institutions responsible for science funding.

Scientific production of Brazilian researchers focusing on oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology

Abstract We analyzed the distribution characteristics of the scientific production of Brazilian dentistry researchers of the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development. The Lattes curriculum data of 211 researchers from Oral Pathology, Oral Surgery, and Oral Medicine fields were included (2018-2020). Over their academic career, 39 researchers published 7,555 papers (average, 175 articles/researcher); 3,876/7,555 papers were indexed in the Web of Science. During 2018-2020, 1,440/7,555 (19%) papers were published. Brazilian dental researchers contribute significantly to international research by participating in scientific journals' editorial boards, evaluating research promotion agencies, training researchers, and contributing to scientific and technological development.

Publications, by different surgical specialties, on patient-reported outcomes of oncoplastic surgery

Summary OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the publications authored by plastic surgeons with those from other specialties' surgeons on patient-reported outcomes of oncoplastic surgery. METHODS: A review was carried out on the Medline database, emcompassing five years (2015-2020). Studies about partial breast reconstruction after conservative treatment, immediate or delayed, by any technique, which presented patient-reported outcomes, were included. RESULTS: We found 292 articles, from which 142 met the eligibility criteria. Publications were stratified into groups 1 (plastic surgeons) and 2 (other surgical specialties), and also into groups A (only plastic surgeons), B (only other specialties) and C (both), and compared statistically. Most publications (60.6%) were attributed to specialties other than plastic surgery. Nineteen percent had only plastic surgeons as authors, 50% only other specialties' surgeons, and 31% had both. There was no difference between groups regarding the impact factor of the journals in any of the stratifications, and the majority was published in journals with impact factor ≤2. CONCLUSION: In the last years, surgeons from specialties other than plastic surgery published more about the results of the oncoplastic surgery reported by the patients. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding the impact factor of the journals.

Identification of Fraudulent Scientific Journals

ABSTRACT: There is a growing need to produce scientific publications in universities, with the resulting increase in manuscripts submitted for review to scientific journals. Open access, a model designed to increase the dissemination of knowledge, has become a business model for certain fraudulent or predatory journals, which see the payment of publication rates by the authors as a money-making venture. These journals take advantage of some researchers' lack of knowledge about the types of journals and how the normal publishing process of a serious journal works, characterized by a peer review of the scientific work, a process that usually takes several months. Predatory journals are a real threat, for both the quality of scientific articles published and for the authors, who pay high prices to have their work published in journals of low or no quality. The aim of this article is to describe the characteristics of the existing scientific journals a nd highlight aspects that authors should consider to identify and avoid fraudulent journals.

RESUMEN: Existe una necesidad creciente de producir publicaciones científicas en las universidades, con el consiguiente incremento de manuscritos enviados a evaluación a las revistas científicas. El open access, un modelo originado para aumentar la diffusion del conocimiento, se transformó en un modelo de negocio para ciertas revistas fraudulentas o depredadoras, que vieron en el pago de las tasas de publicación por parte de los autores una oportunidad de ganar dinero. Estas revistas se aprovechan del bajo conocimiento que tienen algunos investigadores sobre los tipos de revistas existentes y sobre cómo funciona el proceso editorial normal de una revista seria, que se caracteriza por una revisión por parte de pares del trabajo científico, proceso que suele durar varios meses. Las revistas depredadoras son una amenaza real, tanto para la calidad de los artículos científicos publicados como para los autores, que pagan elevados presios por la publicación de sus trabajos en revistas con bajo o ningún estándar de calidad. El objetivo de este artículo es describir las características de las revistas científicas existentes y resaltar aspectos que los autores debieran considerar para identificar y evitar revistas fraudulentas.

Brazilian authors don't cite Brazilian authors: Nothing has changed since 1994 / Os Autores brasileiros não citam os autores brasileiros: Nada mudou desde 1994

Abstract Objective To outline the profile of self-citations from Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Rev Bras Ortop) and citations of this journal in other medical orthopaedic journals with general or specific content in a knowledge area of the specialty. Methods This is an observational cross-sectional study of the frequency of self-citations and citations from Rev Bras Ortop in five other medical orthopaedic journals from different countries, all published in English. The last 15 articles published in 2020 in each of the six journals were analyzed. The references used in each of them were evaluated to identify the journal in which they were originally published. The frequency of distribution of the four main journals cited, their position, and the relative percentage to the total number of citations were observed and recorded in each of the six journals. The number of times that the Rev Bras Ortop was cited in each of the selected foreign journals was assessed using its absolute and relative frequencies. Results The total number of citations evaluated in this study was 2,527 (ranging from 386 to 486 per magazine). Rev Bras Ortop showed a low rate of self-citation (2.6%), being the sixth journal cited in the journal itself (10 out of a total of 386 references). Moreover, Rev Bras Ortop was not mentioned in any of the other five medical journals included in the study (absolute frequency 0, relative frequency 0). Conclusion Rev Bras Ortop has a low reference of itself, with a self-citation rate of 2.6% in the studied period, showing that the Brazilian orthopaedic surgeons do not mention the Brazilian orthopaedic surgeon who publishes in the journal. We suggest the elaboration and implementation of strong strategies to improve the journal's visibility in the world academic-scientific scenario. In addition, it is essential that Brazilian orthopaedic surgeons understand this reality and assist directly and effectively to change this scenario.

Resumo Objetivo Observar o perfil de autocitações da Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Rev Bras Ortop) e de citações deste periódico em outras revistas médicas de ortopedia de conteúdo geral ou específico de uma determinada área de conhecimento da especialidade. Métodos Trata-se de estudo observacional transversal da frequência de autocitações e citações da Rev Bras Ortop em outros cinco periódicos médicos de ortopedia de diferentes países, todas publicadas em língua inglesa. Foram analisados os 15 últimos artigos publicados em 2020 em cada uma das seis revistas estudadas. As referências usadas em cada um delas foi avaliada para identificação do periódico em que foram publicadas originalmente. A distribuição de frequência dos quatro principais periódicos citados, sua posição e o percentual relativo ao total de citações foram observados e registrados em cada uma das seis revistas. O número de vezes em que a Rev Bras Ortop foi citada em cada um dos periódicos estrangeiros selecionados foi avaliado por meio de suas frequências absoluta e relativa. Resultados O total de citações avaliadas neste estudo foi de 2527 (variando de 386 a 486 por revista). A Rev Bras Ortop apresentou baixa taxa de autocitação (2,6%), sendo citada na própria revista na sexta posição (10 de um total de 386 referências). No período estudado, a Rev Bras Ortop não foi citada em nenhum dos outros cinco periódicos médicos incluídos no estudo (frequência absoluta 0, frequência relativa 0). Conclusão Observou-se que a Rev Bras Ortop apresenta baixa referência de si própria, com taxa de autocitação de 2,6% no período estudado, mostrando que de fato o ortopedista brasileiro não cita o ortopedista brasileiro que publica na revista. Sugerimos a elaboração e a implementação de estratégias fortes de melhora da visibilidade do periódico no cenário acadêmico-científico mundial. Além disso, é fundamental que os ortopedistas brasileiros entendam esta realidade e auxiliem direta e efetivamente em sua mudança.

Las 100 revistas de mayor impacto sobre farmacología, toxicología y farmacia / The 100 highest impact pharmacology, toxicology and pharmacy journals

Introducción: Los indicadores bibliométricos ayudan a evaluar la repercusión de la evidencia disponible. Objetivo: Comparar el Factor de Impacto, el Eigenfactor Score, SCImago Journal & Country Rank y el Source Normalized Impact per Paper, en revistas de farmacología, toxicología y farmacia de mayor impacto a nivel mundial en sus ediciones 2018. Métodos: Estudio descriptivo, retrospectivo, obtenido del análisis bibliométrico. Se realizó una búsqueda electrónica en el Instituto para la Información Científica en revistas incluidas en el Journal Citation Report (https://scijournal.org/), para la obtención del Factor de Impacto y Puntuación del factor propio, en el portal web oficial de Scimago Journal para acceder al SCImago Journal & Country Rank (https://www.scimagojr.com/) y para la obtención del Source Normalized Impact per Paper en el portal Journal Indicators (https://www.journalindicators.com/indicators), edición 2018. Los datos se cuantificaron mediante el paquete estadístico STATA v.14.0. Se analizó las características de las revistas para cada indicador, la correlación entre las variables se estimó mediante la prueba de Spearman. Resultados: Se analizaron 100 revistas, todas indizadas en las bases de datos seleccionadas. Los coeficientes de correlación de Spearman obtenidos entre los indicadores estudiados fueron: Factor de Impacto y Puntuación del factor propio = 0,246; Factor de Impacto y Scimago Journal & Country Rank = 0,758; Factor de impacto y Source Normalized Impact per Paper = 0,680; Puntuación del factor propio y Scimago Journal & Country Rank = 0,367, Puntuación del factor propio y Source Normalized Impact per Paper = 0,264 y SCImago Journal & Country Rank y Source Normalized Impact per Paper = 0,541; además fueron estadísticamente significativas (p < 0,05). Conclusiones: Se encontró una correlación moderada a alta y significativa entre el factor de impacto, Puntuación del factor propio, SCImago Journal & Country Rank y el Source Normalized Impact per Paper(AU)

Introduction: Bibliometric indicators are useful to evaluate the impact of the evidence available. Objective: Compare the Impact Factor, the Eigenfactor Score, the SCImago Journal & Country Rank and the Source Normalized Impact per Paper of the highest worldwide impact pharmacology, toxicology and pharmacy journals in their 2018 editions. Methods: A retrospective descriptive study was performed of data obtained from bibliometric analysis. An electronic search was conducted at the Scientific Information Institute of journals included in the Journal Citation Report (https://scijournal.org/) to obtain the Impact Factor and the Eigenfactor Score, in the SCImago Journal official web portal to access the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (https://www.scimagojr.com/) and in Journal Indicators (https://www.journalindicators.com/indicators) 2018 edition to obtain the Source Normalized Impact per Paper. Data were quantified with the statistical package STATA v.14.0. An analysis was done of the characteristics of the journals for each indicator, whereas correlation between the variables was estimated with Spearman's test. Results: A total 100 journals were examined, all of them indexed in the databases selected. Examination of the indicators studied revealed the following Spearman's correlation coefficients: Impact Factor and Eigenfactor Score = 0,246; Impact Factor and SCImago Journal & Country Rank = 0,758; Impact Factor and Source Normalized Impact per Paper = 0,680; Eigenfactor Score and SCImago Journal & Country Rank = 0,367, Eigenfactor Score and Source Normalized Impact per Paper = 0,264, and SCImago Journal & Country Rank and Source Normalized Impact per Paper = 0,541. They were all statistically significant (p < 0,05). Conclusions: A moderate to high and significant correlation was found between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Score, SCImago Journal & Country Rank and Source Normalized Impact per Paper(AU)

Revista de Enfermería, el reto de difundir el conocimiento / Revista de Enfermería, the challenge of spreading knowledge

La Revista de Enfermería del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social es uno de los espacios más importantes para la difusión del conocimiento de los profesionales de la salud en enfermería en este país, dado que cumple con su misión de publicar artículos basados en investigaciones realizadas con rigor metodológico y que abordan temas actuales que ofrecen mayor información para fundamentar las buenas prácticas de enfermería, con estricto apego a los estándares internacionales de publicación y a las buenas prácticas editoriales. Nuestra visión es que cuente con factor de impacto y se mantenga como un referente en el campo de la enfermería nacional e internacional.

Revista de Enfermería del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social (Nursing Journal of the Mexican Institute of Social Security) is one of the most important spaces for the dissemination of knowledge of health professionals in nursing in Mexico, as it fulfills its mission of publishing articles based on research carried out with methodological rigor and that address current issues that offer more information to support good nursing practices, with strict adherence to international publication stan- dards and good editorial practices. Our vision is that it has an impact factor and that it remains a benchmark in the nursing field, national and worldwide.

Evaluating Journal Impact Factor: a systematic survey of the pros and cons, and overview of alternative measures

Journal Impact Factor (JIF) has several intrinsic flaws, which highlight its inability to adequately measure citation distributions or indicate journal quality. Despite these flaws, JIF is still widely used within the academic community, resulting in the propagation of potentially misleading information. A critical review of the usefulness of JIF is needed including an overview of the literature to identify viable alternative metrics. The objectives of this study are: (1) to assess the usefulness of JIF by compiling and comparing its advantages and disadvantages; (2) to record the differential uses of JIF within research environments; and (3) to summarize and compare viable alternative measures to JIF. Methods: Three separate literature search strategies using MEDLINE and Web of Science were completed to address the three study objectives. Each search was completed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Results were compiled in tabular format and analyzed based on reporting frequency. Results: For objective (1), 84 studies were included in qualitative analysis. It was found that the recorded advantages of JIF were outweighed by disadvantages (18 disadvantages vs. 9 advantages). For objective (2), 653 records were included in a qualitative analysis. JIF was found to be most commonly used in journal ranking (n = 653, 100%) and calculation of scientific research productivity (n = 367, 56.2%). For objective (3), 65 works were included in qualitative analysis. These articles revealed 45 alternatives, which includes 18 alternatives that improve on highly reported disadvantages of JIF. Conclusion: JIF has many disadvantages and is applied beyond its original intent, leading to inaccurate information. Several metrics have been identified to improve on certain disadvantages of JIF. Integrated Impact Indicator (I3) shows great promise as an alternative to JIF. However, further scientometric analysis is needed to assess its properties.(AU)