A Review of Journal Impact Metrics and Characteristics to Assist Emergency Medicine Investigators with Manuscript Submission Decisions

Bibliometric analysis of the official journals of internal medicine societies in Europe

INTRODUCTION

Bibliometrics evaluates the quality of biomedical journals. The aim of this study has been to compare the main bibliometric indexes of the official journals of scientific societies of Internal Medicine in Europe.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Bibliometric information was obtained from the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases. Both impact metrics (Journal Impact Factor [JIF], CiteScore) and normalized metrics (Journal Citation Indicator [JCI], Normalized Eigenfactor, Source Normalized Impact per Paper [SNIP] and SCImago Journal Rank [SJR]) of the journals for the year 2022 were analyzed, and their evolution over the last decade was described.

RESULTS

Twenty-three official journals from 33 scientific societies were evaluated. Eight journals were included in WoS and 11 in Scopus. The best positioned journals in 2022 were: 1) European Journal of Internal Medicine, which ranked in the first quartile (Q1) for JIF, CiteScore and JCI metrics, exceeding values of 1 in Normalized Eigenfactor and SNIP metrics; 2) Internal and Emergency Medicine, with Q1 for CiteScore and JCI metrics, and with values >1 in Normalized EigenFactor and SNIP metrics; 3) Polish Archives of Internal Medicine, with Q1 for JCI metrics; 4) Revista Clínica Española, with Q2 for JIF, CiteScore and JCI metrics; and 5) Acta Medica Belgica, with Q2 for CiteScore and JCI metrics. These journals increased their impact metrics in the last 3 years, in parallel with the COVID pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Five official journals of European Internal Medicine societies, including Revista Clínica Española, meet high quality standards.

Ranking of addiction journals in eight widely used impact metrics

Background and aims

Journal metrics assess impact upon the research literature, and are now used to assess individual researchers in hiring and promotion decisions. This study compared the ranking of addiction journals according to eight widely used metrics; assessed the correlations between journal rankings; and assessed changes over time in metric scores.

Methods

Data pertaining to the 2020 scores on eight metrics for 43 journals were obtained and the top 20 ranking in each compared and the correlations between rankings assessed. The Impact Factor was employed to assess changes over time.

Results

Ignoring the two categorization systems used by some metrics, 31 journals appeared in at least one metric top 20 and 11 in all eight. The top rank in each was occupied by one of three journals. Three-quarters of the correlations between rankings were above 6.0. The number of journals with an Impact Factor rose from 23 in 1997 to 38 in 2020, and the journals added tended to focus on addictions other than alcohol and drugs or have a specific focus.

Conclusions and discussion

The results indicate a concentration of journals at the top of the metrics and moderate to strong agreement between them, but almost three-quarters of journals appeared in at least one metric. The longitudinal data reflect both a broadening and specialization of the addiction field. The study limitations include exclusion of some journals and metrics.

The weighted impact factor: the paper evaluation index based on the citation ratio

Purpose

This study distinguishes the academic influence of different papers published in journals of the same subject or field based on the modification of the journal impact factor.

Design/methodology/approach

Taking SSCI journals in library and information science (LIS) as the research object, the authors first explore the skewness degree of the citation distribution of journal articles. Then, we define the paper citation ratio as the weight of impact factor to modify the journal impact factor for the evaluation of papers, namely the weighted impact factor. The authors further explore the feasibility of the weighted impact factor in evaluating papers.

Findings

The research results show that different types of skewness exist in the citation distribution of journal papers. Particularly, 94% of journal paper citations are highly skewed, while the rest are moderately skewed. The weighted impact factor has a closer correlation with the citation frequency of papers than the journal impact factor. It resolves the issue that the journal impact factor tends to exaggerate the influence of low-cited papers in journals with high impact factors or weaken the influence of high-cited papers in journals with low impact factors.

Originality/value

The weighted impact factor is constructed based on the skewness of the citation distribution of journal articles. It provides a new method to distinguish the academic influence of different papers published in journals of the same subject or field, then avoids the situation that papers published in the same journal having the same academic impact.

A Review of COVID-19-Related Publications and Lag Times During the First Six Months of the Year 2020

INTRODUCTION

Considering the need for information regarding approaches to prevention and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we sought to determine publication lag times of COVID-19-related original research articles published in top general medicine and emergency medicine (EM) journals. We further sought to characterize the types of COVID-19 publications within these journals.

METHODS

We reviewed 125 top-ranked general medicine journals and 20 top-ranked EM-specific journals for COVID-19-related publications. We abstracted article titles and manuscript details for each COVID-19-related article published between January 1-June 30, 2020, and categorized articles as one of the following: original research; case report; review; or commentary. We abstracted data for preprint publications over the same time period and determined whether articles from the general medicine and EM journals had been previously published as preprint articles. Our primary outcomes were the following: 1) lag time (days) between global cumulative World Health Organization (WHO)-confirmed cases of COVID-19 and publications; 2) lag times between preprint article publication and peer-reviewed journal publication; and 3) lag times between submission and publication in peer-reviewed journals. Our secondary outcome was to characterize COVID-19-related publications.

RESULTS

The first original research publications appeared in a general medicine journal 20 days and in an EM journal 58 days after the first WHO-confirmed case of COVID-19. We found median and mean lag times between preprint publications and journal publications of 32 days (19, 49) and 36 days (22) for general medicine journals, and 26 days (16, 36) and 25 days (13) for EM journals. Median and mean lag times between submission and publication were 30 days (19, 45) and 35 days (13) for general medicine journals, and 23 days (11, 39) and 27 days (19) for EM journals. Of 2530 general medicine journal articles and 351 EM journal articles, 28% and 23.6% were original research. We noted substantial closing of the preprint to peer-reviewed publication (160 days pre-pandemic) and peer-reviewed journal submission to publication (194 days pre-pandemic) lag times for COVID-19 manuscripts.

CONCLUSION

We found a rapid and robust response with shortened publication lag times to meet the need for the publication of original research and other vital medical information related to COVID-19 during the first six months of 2020.

Comparison of performances of top emergency medicine journals in terms of COVID-19 publications in 2020

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to evaluate the qualitative and quantitative contribution of Emergency Medicine (EM) journals to scientific literature on COVID-19 and compare the journals in terms of publications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a comparison of top EM journals by hand-search in terms of COVID-19 publications and citations between January 1st and December 31st, 2020. Publications were also categorized according to research field, country and article types. Data were given as numbers and percentages.

RESULTS

Among 18 EM journals, Resuscitation ranked in the first place and American Journal of Emergency Medicine ranked in the last place according to Impact Factor. In these journals, 512 (12.2%) articles related to COVID-19 were published. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine and Internal and Emergency Medicine published the greatest amount of publications related to COVID-19 (n = 71). The American Journal of Emergency Medicine was also the leading journal in terms of "Total Citations to COVID-19 Articles" (n = 1192). Western Journal of Emergency Medicine published the greatest proportion of COVID-19 articles (Total COVID-19 Articles/Total Articles = 0.3). World Journal of Emergency Surgery ranked in the first place in terms of citations per COVID-19 articles (n = 33.2). The most common studied field was Effects of COVID-19 on the Health System (n = 222). The US was the most productive country with 188 COVID-19 publications and 1411 citations to these publications, followed by Italy.

CONCLUSION

The contribution of EM journals to COVID-19 literature is controversial. "Effects of COVID-19 on the Health System" is the most studied field. "Clinical Properties, Ethical Issues and Treatment Methods" are neglected fields in EM journals.