Abstract
Different approaches can be chosen to quantify the impact and merits of scientific oncology publications. These include source of publication (including journal reputation and impact factor), whether or not articles are cited by others, and access/download figures. When relying on citation counts, one needs to obtain access to citation databases and has to consider that results differ from one database to another. Accumulation of citations takes time and their dynamics might differ from journal to journal and topic to topic. Therefore, we wanted to evaluate the correlation between citation and download figures, hypothesising that articles with fewer downloads also accumulate fewer citations. Typically, publishers provide download figures together with the article. We extracted and analysed the 50 most viewed articles from 5 different open access oncology journals. For each of the 5 journals and also all journals combined, correlation between number of accesses and citations was limited (r = 0.01-0.30). Considerable variations were also observed when analyses were restricted to specific article types such as reviews only (r = 0.21) or case reports only (r = 0.53). Even if year of publication was taken into account, high correlation coefficients were the exception from the rule. In conclusion, downloads are not a universal surrogate for citation figures.
Highlights
Different approaches can be chosen to quantify the impact and merits of scientific oncology publications
The present analysis focussed on highly accessed articles published in 5 arbitrarily selected open access oncology journals
Considerable variations were observed when these analyses were restricted to specific article types such as reviews only (r = 0.21), research articles only (r = 0.34) or case reports only (r = 0.53)
Summary
Different approaches can be chosen to quantify the impact and merits of scientific oncology publications These include source of publication (including journal reputation and impact factor), whether or not articles are cited by others, and access/download figures. We extracted and analysed the 50 most viewed articles from 5 different open access oncology journals. Previous studies suggested more or less strong correlations between article download and citation figures for several areas of scientific research (Watson, 2009; Schloegl & Gorraiz, 2010). For 12 articles with available access figures, a high correlation coefficient was identified (r = 0.87, p < 0.001) and we decided to embark on a larger and more detailed analysis, which included several open access journals covering either all aspects or specific areas of cancer research and treatment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
