Citation advantage of COVID-19-related publications

With the global spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, scientists from various disciplines responded quickly to this historical public health emergency. The sudden boom of COVID-19-related papers in a short period of time may bring unexpected influence to some commonly used bibliometric indicators. By a large-scale investigation using Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, this brief communication confirms the citation advantage of COVID-19-related papers empirically through the lens of Essential Science Indicators' highly cited paper. More than 8% of COVID-19-related papers published during 2020 and 2021 were selected as Essential Science Indicators highly cited papers, which was much higher than the set global benchmark value of 1%. The citation advantage of COVID-19-related papers for different Web of Science categories/countries/journal impact factor quartiles was also demonstrated. The distortions of COVID-19-related papers' citation advantage to some bibliometric indicators such as journal impact factor were discussed at the end of this brief communication.

Looking Back on 2022 With Neurospine.

On behalf of the editorial office of Neurospine, we would like to extend our appreciation to all the readers who have supported the journal throughout the year. Neurospine was established in March 2018 through a collaboration of 3 leading spinal neurosurgery societies from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Since then, Neurospine has continued to enhance its academic impact, serving as a platform for sharing knowledge and information related to the management of spinal diseases. In this article, we aim to present the bibliometrics of Neurospine, including the submission and publication of manuscripts and the peer review process. We are looking forward to continued growth and serving the academic community to the best of our ability.

Publication metrics: Types, utility, and caveats

Publication metrics enable the assessment of the performance of citations or utilization of published work. Journal-level metrics depend on the database whose citations are analyzed. Publication metrics from the Web of Science include the widely-used journal impact factor (JIF) and other indices such as Journal Citation Impact, Eigenfactor, normalized Eigenfactor, and Article Influence Score. Metrics from Scopus include the CiteScore, Source Normalized Impact Factor, and SCImago Journal Rank. Author-level metrics such as total citations, h-index, i10-index, and g-index inevitably increase with time and can be inflated by self-citations. Article-level metrics such as total citations and online attention scores derived from Scopus (PlumX Metrics) or Altmetric indicate the extent of utilization and discussion in scientific circles of a particular article. Publication metrics are useful to provide a bird's eye view of how well an individual journal or article has been cited or used. They do not necessarily reflect article quality. As an example, some of the articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Scores are actually retracted publications that attained high scores due to the negative debate that they elicited. Journal-level metrics such as the JIF are fluid and prone to historical fluctuations from year to year, most recently observed by increases in the JIF of journals which published a lot of coronavirus disease 19-related content. Research assessment of individual scientists often misuses publication metrics such as the JIF, when they should instead rely on a critical appraisal of research articles by assessors.Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications. All rights reserved.

Publishing trends of journals and articles in Journal Citation Reports during the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive study

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the changes that occurred in journal and article publishing during the noncontact period that started in 2020 due to COVID-19. Methods: The integrated journal list in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2017–2021 and the search results of Web of Science were analyzed using pivot tables in Microsoft Excel. The articles, citations, impact factor (IF), publishers, open access (OA) status, and compound annual growth rate (CAGR) were investigated using the data. Results: The CAGRs of articles, citations, and IFs in JCR journals increased throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the increase in OA articles was accompanied by a decreasing share of subscription articles. The top 20 journals in JCR-SCIE (Science Citation Index Expanded), based on the number of articles, accepted OA policies and showed a strong influence, accounting for 7% to 9% of all articles. MDPI and Frontiers were OA publishers included among the top 10 publishers. Large publishers maintained their competitiveness through mergers and acquisitions with OA publishers. Due to the rapid distribution of OA and early access articles as part of the international response to overcome COVID-19, the CAGRs of citations and IFs increased more than that of articles, and the publication and use of journal articles have become more active. Conclusion: The publication and use trends in JCR journals analyzed herein will provide useful information for researchers' selection of journals for article submission, analyses of research performance, and libraries' journal subscription contracts. © 2023 Korean Council of Science Editors

Male fertility: A review of the publications from April - June 2021.

The article provides an overview of the most significant publications on the topic of male infertility. The main selection criteria were considered the practical significance of the article, as well as the impact factor of the journal in which it was published, according to the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR). As a result, a list of 10 works published in the II quarter (April - June) of 2021 was formed. The review includes articles on the following issues: the effectiveness of repeated micro-TESE in non-obstructive azoospermia, the role of COVID-19 in male fertility, the effect of testosterone therapy on spermatogenesis, testicular microlithiasis, electroejaculation as a method of obtaining spermatozoa, harm from carrying cell phones near the genitals, prediction of the effectiveness of intrauterine insemination, the effect of advanced paternal age on sperm aneuploidy, and the importance of the microbiome for male fertility.Copyright © 2021 Rostovskii Gosudarstvennyi Meditsinskii Universitet. All Rights Reserved.

Association of Non-traditional Indicators of Readers' Engagement With Traditional Dissemination Metrics of COVID-19-Related Research.

INTRODUCTION:  Researchers are increasingly interested in appraising the impact of their research work, which eventually drives public perception. The overall impact of a study can only be gauged if we consider both traditional and non-traditional dissemination patterns. Hence, we preferred to study the association between the non-traditional reader engagement metrics and traditional dissemination metrics in relation to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related research published in five high-impact peer-reviewed medical journals. METHOD:  This observational study was conducted using data sourced from Altmetric, including the Altmetric attention score (AAS), an aggregate score of an article's dissemination. New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet Infectious Diseases, Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID), Chest Journal (CHEST), and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) were included in the study based on the prevalence of COVID-19-related original research published in each of them. The number of citations was framed as the reference for traditional metrics. To avoid artificial variance, data were collected on the same day, November 13, 2022. Correlational analyses were performed using the Pearson correlation coefficient using Minitab 17 (Minitab Inc., State College, PA). The relationship between the variables was considered very weak if r<0.3, weak if r: 0.3 to 0.5, moderate if r: 0.5 to 0.7, and strong for r>0.7. RESULTS:  We found a very weak correlation between citations and AAS for Clinical Infectious Diseases, Lancet Infectious Diseases, and CHEST, whereas the correlation was moderate for NEJM and JAMA. The correlation between citations and Twitter mentions was very weak for Clinical Infectious Disease, Lancet Infectious Disease, and CHEST, but it improved for NEJM and JAMA. There was a very weak correlation between citations and news mentions for Clinical Infectious Diseases, Lancet Infectious Diseases, and CHEST. CONCLUSION:  Our study highlights that the traditional indicator, i.e., citation has a very weak to moderate correlation with the AAS and it doesn't capture the entire influence of a research publication. Also, the current method of determining a journal's impact factor doesn't take this disparity into consideration. Hence, there needs to have a more inclusive strategy to define the impact of scientific research on the general population in real-time.

Association Between Immediacy of Citations and Altmetrics in COVID-19 Research by Artificial Neural Networks.

OBJECTIVES: Both citations and Altmetrics are indexes of influence of a publication, potentially useful, but to what extent that the professional-academic citation and media-dominated Altmetrics are consistent with each other is a topic worthy of being investigated. The objective is to show their correlation. METHODS: DOI and citation information of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) researches were obtained from the Web of Science, its Altmetric indicators were collected from the Altmetrics. Correlation between the immediacy of citation and Altmetrics of COVID-19 research was studied by artificial neural networks. RESULTS: Pearson coefficients are 0.962, 0.254, 0.222, 0.239, 0.363, 0.218, 0.136, 0.134, and 0.505 (P < 0.01) for dimensions citation, attention score, journal impact factor, news, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, video, and Mendeley correlated with the SCI citation, respectively. The citations from the Web of Science and that from the Altmetrics have deviance large enough in the current. Altmetric score is not precise to describe the immediacy of citations of academic publication in COVID-19 research. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of news, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, video, and Mendeley on SCI citations are similar to that of the journal impact factor. This paper performs a pioneer study for investigating the role of academic topics across Altmetric sources on the dissemination of scholarly publications.

Research on COVID-19 and its influence on Latin American medical journals impact factor.

INTRODUCTION: The arrival of the pandemic caused by coronavirus disease (COVID-19) exponentially increased scientific production. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the influence of COVID-19-related scientific production on the impact factor values of Latin American medical journals. METHODS: Journals related to the Medicine categories included in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) were used. Impact factor data from the 2020 and 2021 editions were used to compare the citations received by documents related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A decrease in the impact factor values of the evaluated journals was observed when the citations received by works related to COVID-19 were eliminated. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of information published on COVID-19 and the citations received influenced the impact increase in 2021 JCR.

INTRODUCCIÓN: La llegada de la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19) incrementó exponencialmente la producción científica. OBJETIVO: Analizar la influencia de la producción científica acerca de COVID-19 en los valores del factor de impacto de revistas médicas latinoamericanas. MÉTODOS: Se emplearon las revistas de categorías relacionadas con la medicina del Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Se utilizaron los datos del factor del impacto de las ediciones de 2020 y 2021 para establecer una comparación respecto a las citas recibidas por los documentos relativos a COVID-19. RESULTADOS: Se observó un descenso en los valores del factor de impacto de las revistas evaluadas cuando se eliminan las citas recibidas por los documentos relativos a COVID-19. CONCLUSIONES: El volumen de la información publicada sobre COVID-19 y las citas recibidas influyeron en el aumento del impacto en el JCR de 2021.

Research on COVID-19 and its influence on Latin American medical journals impact factor / Investigaciones sobre COVID-19 y su influencia en el factor de impacto de las revistas médicas latinoamericanas

Resumen Introducción: La llegada de la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19) incrementó exponencialmente la producción científica. Objetivo: Analizar la influencia de la producción científica acerca de COVID-19 en los valores del factor de impacto de revistas médicas latinoamericanas. Métodos: Se emplearon las revistas de categorías relacionadas con la medicina del Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Se utilizaron los datos del factor del impacto de las ediciones de 2020 y 2021 para establecer una comparación respecto a las citas recibidas por los documentos relativos a COVID-19. Resultados: Se observó un descenso en los valores del factor de impacto de las revistas evaluadas cuando se eliminan las citas recibidas por los documentos relativos a COVID-19. Conclusiones: El volumen de la información publicada sobre COVID-19 y las citas recibidas influyeron en el aumento del impacto en el JCR de 2021.

Abstract Introduction: The arrival of the pandemic caused by coronavirus disease (COVID-19) exponentially increased scientific production. Objective: To analyze the influence of COVID-19-related scientific production on the impact factor values of Latin American medical journals. Methods: Journals related to the Medicine categories included in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) were used. Impact factor data from the 2020 and 2021 editions were used to compare the citations received by documents related to COVID-19. Results: A decrease in the impact factor values of the evaluated journals was observed when the citations received by works related to COVID-19 were eliminated. Conclusions: The volume of information published on COVID-19 and the citations received influenced the impact increase in 2021 JCR.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Biomedical Publications and Their Citation Frequency.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in enormous related publications. However, the citation frequency of these documents and their influence on the journal impact factor (JIF) are not well examined. We aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on biomedical research publications and their citation frequency. METHODS: We searched publications on biomedical research in the Web of Science using the search terms "COVID-19," "SARS-Cov-2," "2019 corona*," "corona virus disease 2019," "coronavirus disease 2019," "novel coronavirus infection" and "2019-ncov." The top 200 journals were defined as those with a higher number of COVID-19 publications than other journals in 2020. The COVID-19 impact ratio was calculated as the ratio of the average number of citations per item in 2021 to the JIF for 2020. RESULTS: The average number of citations for the top 200 journals in 2021, per item published in 2020, was 25.7 (range, 0-270). The average COVID-19 impact ratio was 3.84 (range, 0.26-16.58) for 197 journals that recorded the JIF for 2020. The average JIF ratio for the top 197 journals including the JIFs for 2020 and 2021 was 1.77 (range, 0.68-8.89). The COVID-19 impact ratio significantly correlated with the JIF ratio (r = 0.403, P = 0.010). Twenty-five Korean journals with a COVID-19 impact ratio > 1.5 demonstrated a higher JIF ratio (1.31 ± 0.39 vs. 1.01 ± 0.18, P < 0.001) than 33 Korean journals with a lower COVID-19 impact ratio. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pandemic infection has significantly impacted the trends in biomedical research and the citation of related publications.

Impact factor JUMPS after the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective study in Dermatology journals.

BACKGROUND: The term "JUMPS" was used to describe the impact factor (IF) in an article published in PubMed in 2021, representing an increase of more than 40% of IF. AIMS: In this study, we aimed to compare the growth rate of IF JUMPS in Dermatology in the last 5 years, and particularly the effect of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study evaluated the growth rate (JUMP) in IF from 2016 to 2020. We used the Friedman and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests. We classified JUMPS in negative growth rate; Q1 to Q4 quartiles; and journals with > 100%. A 76-100% growth rate was observed in five (7%) journals, and twelve journals (17%) depicted a 51-75% percentage of change. RESULTS: Several journals in the Dermatology category increased their IF by 50%. Repeated measures analyses showed a significant difference (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Although we found journals with growth rates in the four quartiles, no journals depicted negative growth rates nor > 100% growth. Knowing the growing trends in this category might supplement the assessment of target journals for authors looking to submit their works.

Scientometric assessment of scientific documents published in 2020 on herbal medicines used for COVID-19.

Objective: Many studies have suggested herbal medicines as alternatives or adjuvants to modern drugs for COVID-19. Their scientometric analyses can provide a scientific overview of this topic. Materials and methods: Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus were searched for articles on the use of herbal medicines in COVID-19 published until 26 October 2020. Collected data were analyzed for document type, subject area, top journal, citation number, and authors' collaboration network using VOSviewer 1.6.15, ScientoPy 2.0.3, Gephi 0.9.2, and SPSS 15 statistical tools. Results: After screening the 3185 retrieved records, 378 and 849 records, respectively from WOS and Scopus, remained for quantity analysis. Original and review articles were the two main types of papers in both databases. Top subject areas were drug and medicine, respectively in the WOS and Scopus databases. The top three productive countries in the field were China, the US, and India. The most cited article was a practice guideline in both databases. "Journal of Biomolecular Structure Dynamics" in WOS and "Chinese Traditional and Herbal Drugs" in Scopus were the top journals. Top keywords included "COVID-19″ and "Traditional Chinese Medicine". US authors had the highest collaboration with other authors. Conclusions: The current study provides a snapshot of the quantity and characteristics of published scholarly documents in recent months in the intersection of herbal medicines and COVID-19. Our findings help scientists to find the existing gaps, identify the active authors and scientific institutes to collaborate with and use their experience to produce new knowledge in the future.

Trends in Front of Neck Access - A bibliometric analysis

Background: Front of Neck Access (FONA) is a critical skill Anaesthetists must be able to perform in the 'Can't Intubate, Can't oxygenate' (CICO) scenario, and is a core technical skill ANZCA registrars must develop during training (ANZCA 2020). However, since the Covid-19 pandemic, opportunities for first hand emergency airway experience have reduced. To gain an understanding of trends in the field of FONA and to guide future advancement, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited papers for Front of Neck Access. Methods: The Thomas Reuters Web of Science database was searched on 13th of June 2021 using the terms;“Front of Neck Access”, “FONA”, “Cricothyroidotomy”, “Surgical cricothyroidotomy”, “Scalpel Cricothyroidotomy”, “Needle Cricothyroidotomy”. The 100 most cited papers relevant to FONA were analysed by design, topic, author, publication year and institution. The journal impact factor for the year 2019 along with Eigenfactor scores were recorded. Results: A total of 787 papers were retrieved from our search. These were ranked by total number of citations. The median number of citations for the top 100 articles was 56.5 (IQR 28), with 44% of articles originating from the USA. The top five cited papers made up 37% of total citations. Anesthesia (n=9) and The British Journal of Anesthesia (n=9) had the greatest number of papers, whilst the greatest number of citations came from Academic Emergency Medicine (n=2456). The years 2011 (n=9) and 2015 (n=9) had the greatest number of papers published. Technique for emergent FONA was the most common theme. Conclusions: The most influential articles in the FONA literature have each been cited at least 35 times, reflecting considerable impact and quality. The USA has produced most research in this area, allowing the widespread dispersion of indications, technique and guidelines at a time when practical experience may be limited due to the pandemic.