ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Comparison of the distribution of citations received by articles published in high, moderate, and low impact factor journals in clinical medicine
- 18 August 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Internal Medicine Journal
- Vol. 40 (8), 587-591
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2010.02247.x
Abstract
Background: Whether the journal impact factor (JIF) indicator reflects the number of citations to an average article of a journal in different subject categories is controversial. We sought to further investigate this issue in general and internal medicine journals. Methods: We selected to evaluate three journals of the above subject category, in each of three different JIF levels (high: 15.5–28.6, moderate: 4.4–4.9 and low: 1.6). Using the Scopus database, we retrieved the original research articles (after detailed screening) and review articles (as classified by Scopus) that were published in the selected journals in 2005 along with the number of citations they received in 2006 and 2007. We pooled the citations for articles of the same type in journals with the same JIF level into distinct variables. Results: There was no marked association between the distribution of citations per article published in general medical journals and their JIF. All distributions studied were skewed to the right (higher number of citations). Specifically, 16–22% of the original research articles accounted for 50% of the total citations to this type of article for all three categories of studied journals; 34–37% of original research articles accounted for 75% of citations. The respective values for review articles were 12–18% and 29–39%. Conclusion: The distribution of citations received by articles published in high, moderate and low impact factor journals in clinical medicine seems similar. The JIF is not an accurate indicator of the citations the average article receives; articles published in low impact factor journals can still be highly cited and vice versa.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Exploring the dynamics of journal citations: Modelling with s-curvesJournal of the Operational Research Society, 2008
- Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factorThe FASEB Journal, 2008
- The top-ten in journal impact factor manipulationArchivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis, 2008
- Beware the tyranny of impact factorsThe Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume, 2008
- Editors may inappropriately influence authors' decisions regarding selection of references in scientific articlesInternational Journal of Impotence Research, 2007
- The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact FactorJAMA, 2006
- The level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality: a comparison to the impact factorBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2004
- Journal impact factors: a ‘bioequivalence’ issue?British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2001
- Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factorBritish Journal of Anaesthesia, 2000
- Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating researchBMJ, 1997