Moises Villaseñor-Almaraz1, Juan Islas-Serrano2, Chiharu Murata3, Ernesto Roldan-Valadez4,5. 1. Directorate of Research, Hospital General de Mexico "Dr. Eduardo Liceaga", Dr. Balmis 148 Street, Col. Doctores, Del. Cuauhtemoc, 06726, Mexico City, Mexico. 2. Escuela de Medicina, Universidad de Sonora, Hermosillo, Mexico. 3. Departamento de Metodologia de La Investigacion, Instituto Nacional de Pediatria, Mexico City, Mexico. 4. Directorate of Research, Hospital General de Mexico "Dr. Eduardo Liceaga", Dr. Balmis 148 Street, Col. Doctores, Del. Cuauhtemoc, 06726, Mexico City, Mexico. ernest.roldan@usa.net. 5. Department of Radiology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Trubetskaya Str., 8, b. 2, 119992, Moscow, Russia. ernest.roldan@usa.net.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the last decade, several journal's editors decided to publish alternative bibliometric indices parallel to the impact factor (IF): Scimago Journal Rank (SJR), Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), Eigenfactor Score (ES) and CiteScore™ (CiteScore); however, there is scarce information about the correlations among them. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the associations between this bibliometrics in the Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging category of the Web of Knowledge. We hypothesized the IF did not show the best correlation with other metrics. METHODS: Retrospective study. We used bibliometrics recorded from the 2017 publicly available versions of the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), SJR ( www.scimagojr.com ), SNIP ( www.journalindicators.com ), and CiteScore ( www.scopus.com ); we also included the Total Cites. We measured the correlations using the Spearman correlation coefficients (RS) for all combinations of the bivariate pair, performed pairwise comparisons of the RS values, and calculated the coefficients of determination. We also tested the statistical significance of the difference between r coefficients between groups. All analyses were conducted with the JMP Pro software. RESULTS: The stronger bivariate correlations were represented by the ES↔Total Cites RS = 0.968, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.937; and the CiteScore↔SJR RS = 0.911, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.829. From 105 possible combinations of pairwise comparisons, 38 depicted a p value > 0.050 which would suggest interchangeability among bivariate correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support our hypothesis that the IF does not show the best correlation between other metrics. Radiologists, interventional radiologist, or nuclear medicine doctors should have a clear understanding of the associations among the journal's bibliometrics for their decision-making during the manuscript submission phase.
INTRODUCTION: In the last decade, several journal's editors decided to publish alternative bibliometric indices parallel to the impact factor (IF): Scimago Journal Rank (SJR), Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), Eigenfactor Score (ES) and CiteScore™ (CiteScore); however, there is scarce information about the correlations among them. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the associations between this bibliometrics in the Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging category of the Web of Knowledge. We hypothesized the IF did not show the best correlation with other metrics. METHODS: Retrospective study. We used bibliometrics recorded from the 2017 publicly available versions of the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), SJR ( www.scimagojr.com ), SNIP ( www.journalindicators.com ), and CiteScore ( www.scopus.com ); we also included the Total Cites. We measured the correlations using the Spearman correlation coefficients (RS) for all combinations of the bivariate pair, performed pairwise comparisons of the RS values, and calculated the coefficients of determination. We also tested the statistical significance of the difference between r coefficients between groups. All analyses were conducted with the JMP Pro software. RESULTS: The stronger bivariate correlations were represented by the ES↔Total Cites RS = 0.968, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.937; and the CiteScore↔SJR RS = 0.911, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.829. From 105 possible combinations of pairwise comparisons, 38 depicted a p value > 0.050 which would suggest interchangeability among bivariate correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support our hypothesis that the IF does not show the best correlation between other metrics. Radiologists, interventional radiologist, or nuclear medicine doctors should have a clear understanding of the associations among the journal's bibliometrics for their decision-making during the manuscript submission phase.
Authors: Mohmed Isaqali Karobari; Manahil Maqbool; Paras Ahmad; Muqthadir Siddiqui Mohammed Abdul; Anand Marya; Adith Venugopal; Gul Muhammad Shaik; Giuseppe Alessandro Scardina; Pietro Messina; Tahir Yusuf Noorani Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 3.411