Article

The impact factor: A critical analysis

Abteilung Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Klinikum Benjamin Franklin, FU Berlin.
RöFo - Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der R (Impact Factor: 1.96). 10/1998; 169(3):220-6. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-1015082
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The impact factor, provided by the Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia (PA), has become the most important evaluation tool for scientific research and academic work. It is calculated by dividing the number of current year citations to the source items published in the journal during the previous two years. In market research, the impact factor provides quantitative evidence for editors and publishers for positioning their journals in relation to the competition. Despite its popularity, the parameter should be used with careful attention to the many phenomena that influence citation rates. The correlation between the citation frequency of a certain article and the impact factor of the journal in which it is published is questionable. A few articles have many citations and the rest are sparsely cited or not at all. Citation impact is more a measure of utility than of scientific value. Authors' selection of references is subject to biases unrelated to quality. Moreover, there is a tremendous bias towards English language journals compared with those in other languages. Finally, different specialties exhibit different ranges of peak impact. The impact factor favours research areas that promote many short-term studies. Conversely, a tendency to treat clinical investigations as less important is created.

1 Follower
 · 
51 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The paper articulates the problems of journal publication in a relatively small country such as Romania where locally (i.e. nationally) published journals include most of the national medical scientific output. The starting point was a study ordered by the Cluj University of Medicine and Pharmacy Scientific Council, for the purpose of obtaining an objectively ranked list of all current Romanian biomedical journals that could be used in the evaluation of the scientific activity of the university academic staff. Sixty-five current biomedical journals were identified—of which more than half were new titles that had appeared over the past 5 years. None of these are included in the Science Citation Index or Journal Citation Reports (JCR). A set of criteria was used for ranking the journals: peer review, inclusion in international databases, publication time lag, language of articles and abstracts, journal specific index and domestic impact factor. The period covered, along with tools and formulas used are presented. The problems of Romanian biomedical journals as well as ways of improving publishing standards are discussed. Also emphasized is the necessity for increased awareness in the medical scholarly community and the role of the library in this respect.
    Health Information & Libraries Journal 05/2001; 18(2):91 - 98. DOI:10.1046/j.1471-1842.2001.d01-15.x · 0.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The paper articulates the problems of journal publication in a relatively small country such as Romania where locally (i.e. nationally) published journals include most of the national medical scientific output. The starting point was a study ordered by the Cluj University of Medicine and Pharmacy Scientific Council, for the purpose of obtaining an objectively ranked list of all current Romanian biomedical journals that could be used in the evaluation of the scientific activity of the university academic staff. Sixty-five current biomedical journals were identified--of which more than half were new titles that had appeared over the past 5 years. None of these are included in the Science Citation Index or Journal Citation Reports (JCR). A set of criteria was used for ranking the journals: peer review, inclusion in international databases, publication time lag, language of articles and abstracts, journal specific index and domestic impact factor. The period covered, along with tools and formulas used are presented. The problems of Romanian biomedical journals as well as ways of improving publishing standards are discussed. Also emphasized is the necessity for increased awareness in the medical scholarly community and the role of the library in this respect.
    Health Information & Libraries Journal 07/2001; 18(2):91-8. DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2532.2001.00313.x · 0.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A preference for English-language sources during determination of Journal Impact Factors (IF) was discussed, IF being published in the annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR). The JCR are derived from data in Science Citation Index (SCI). The aim of this study was, therefore, (i) to review publication countries and languages in JCR, (ii) publication languages in SCI in comparison to further recognised medical bibliographic databanks. Searching (i) countries and languages in JCR Science-Editions 1997 and 1998, (ii) language distributions in publication years 1995 - 2000 in bibliographic databanks SCI, MEDLINE (ME) and EMBASE (EM). (i) Almost 70 % journals in JCR 1997 and 1998 were published in USA, United Kingdom, or The Netherlands. Of two language options present, a number of English-classified journals contained >90 % articles in other languages, whereas >90 % publications in English could occur in Multi-Language (ML) journals, thereby complicating statistical comparisons. 83,9 % JCR-periodicals in 1997 and 85,6 % in 1998 were classified English. English/ML ratios increased exponentially with increasing IF. (ii) 95,5 % of the articles documented 1995 - 2000 in whole SCI and in our constructed SCI segment >Medicine and related areas< were written in English, compared to 88,5 % in ME and 89,8 % in EM. The SCI Medicine segment was 15 % more comprehensive than either MEDLINE or EMBASE. Highly significant differences of language distributions in SCI vs. MEDLINE and especially SCI vs. EMBASE were observed. Retrieval rates in SCI of German-, French-, Japanese- and Chinese-language medical papers published in 2000 were impressively augmented by EMBASE and MEDLINE. (i) Anglo-American publishers' countries and English-language journals prevail in JCR with respect to numbers and IF levels. Publication language English favours citation frequency. (ii) Of databanks studied, SCI shows a maximum preference for English-language sources, thereby causing an English Language Bias during IF derivation.
    DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 02/2002; 127(4):131-7. DOI:10.1055/s-2002-19715 · 0.55 Impact Factor
Show more