Regarding a case report: Rare diseases and bibliometric impact factor

Abstract

Scientific journals’ main strategic objective is to increasingly raise their bibliometric impact factor (BIF). This topic is recurrently dealt with in editorial committees’ meetings. To increase a journal’s BIF, several courses of action can be taken: publish literature reviews on extensively published topics and methodological reviews, publish original articles by prestigious groups, publish studies on very common illnesses (prevalent or incident), or simply not to publish studies expected to be sparsely cited.Focusing, for instance, on the specific area of parasitic infestation, journals will not tend to publish a research paper on a parasite’s epidemiology when the said parasite is present exclusively in a specific area of the world, even if this area is populated by millions of people. If it is in a developing country, the possibility of citation (and therefore of a raising BIF) is much lower. Thus, there will be a bibliometric benefit for the journal, but the given population and its health professionals will ignore that information.Something similar happens with the so-called “case reports.” Many journals include this section among its types of articles, others are withdrawing them, and others are beginning to include them in the Letters to the Editor or Brief Originals sections [1Mahajan R.P. Hunter J.M. Editorial IV. Volume 100: Case reports: should they be confined to the dustbin?.Br J Anaesth. 2008; 100: 744-746Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar, 2Kellett J. Case reports—EJIM’s new policy.Eur J Intern Med. 2008; 19: 389Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar, 3Kurita H. Case reports in psychiatry and clinical neurosciences.Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2011; 65: 303-304Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar]. Most journals acknowledge that they are very interesting for their readers and much read but little cited. Case reports describe very infrequent and normally complex cases. Although case reports may rarely provoke a change in working practice, they can provide important information for it [[4]Kang S. Anecdotes in medicine—15 years of Lancet case reports.Lancet. 2010; 376: 1448-1449Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar]. They sometimes can be embryonic future clinical trials and might have a relevant impact on bibliography [[5]Albrecht J. Meves A. Bigby M. Case reports and case series from Lancet had significant impact on medical literature.J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58: 1227-1232Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (112) Google Scholar]. If this information is not available, the physician will have to start from scratch. Furthermore, it is in this type of situation when health professionals will refer to scientific literature to find solutions to a problem. Also, some authors have indicated that in the future, when more is known about a disease’s etiology, the study of the anecdotic will become relevant and that it is currently already of great value [[6]Jadad AR. Randomised controlled trials. A user’s guide. Available at http://www1.cgmh.org.tw/intr/intr5/c6700/OBGYN/F/Randomized%20tial/chapter7.html. Accessed August 12, 2011.Google Scholar]. However, journals justify the exclusion of this type of article from their contents arguing that they are little cited or continue to publish them albeit acknowledging that their BIF is damaged [1Mahajan R.P. Hunter J.M. Editorial IV. Volume 100: Case reports: should they be confined to the dustbin?.Br J Anaesth. 2008; 100: 744-746Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar, 7Matías-Guiu J. García- Ramos R. The impact factor and editorial decisionsNeurología. 2008; 23: 342-348PubMed Google Scholar, 8Ehara S. Assessing the scientific and educational value of case reports: an editor’s view.Jpn J Radiol. 2011; 29: 1-2Crossref PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar].Scientific journals exist to cater to patients and health professionals, but not to a number. Occasionally, they should sacrifice their BIF to solve the real problems that afflict the population and health workers who read the journal, although they do not cite it. Let us hope that this comment will not remain as only that, a “case report.” Scientific journals’ main strategic objective is to increasingly raise their bibliometric impact factor (BIF). This topic is recurrently dealt with in editorial committees’ meetings. To increase a journal’s BIF, several courses of action can be taken: publish literature reviews on extensively published topics and methodological reviews, publish original articles by prestigious groups, publish studies on very common illnesses (prevalent or incident), or simply not to publish studies expected to be sparsely cited. Focusing, for instance, on the specific area of parasitic infestation, journals will not tend to publish a research paper on a parasite’s epidemiology when the said parasite is present exclusively in a specific area of the world, even if this area is populated by millions of people. If it is in a developing country, the possibility of citation (and therefore of a raising BIF) is much lower. Thus, there will be a bibliometric benefit for the journal, but the given population and its health professionals will ignore that information. Something similar happens with the so-called “case reports.” Many journals include this section among its types of articles, others are withdrawing them, and others are beginning to include them in the Letters to the Editor or Brief Originals sections [1Mahajan R.P. Hunter J.M. Editorial IV. Volume 100: Case reports: should they be confined to the dustbin?.Br J Anaesth. 2008; 100: 744-746Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar, 2Kellett J. Case reports—EJIM’s new policy.Eur J Intern Med. 2008; 19: 389Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar, 3Kurita H. Case reports in psychiatry and clinical neurosciences.Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2011; 65: 303-304Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar]. Most journals acknowledge that they are very interesting for their readers and much read but little cited. Case reports describe very infrequent and normally complex cases. Although case reports may rarely provoke a change in working practice, they can provide important information for it [[4]Kang S. Anecdotes in medicine—15 years of Lancet case reports.Lancet. 2010; 376: 1448-1449Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar]. They sometimes can be embryonic future clinical trials and might have a relevant impact on bibliography [[5]Albrecht J. Meves A. Bigby M. Case reports and case series from Lancet had significant impact on medical literature.J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58: 1227-1232Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (112) Google Scholar]. If this information is not available, the physician will have to start from scratch. Furthermore, it is in this type of situation when health professionals will refer to scientific literature to find solutions to a problem. Also, some authors have indicated that in the future, when more is known about a disease’s etiology, the study of the anecdotic will become relevant and that it is currently already of great value [[6]Jadad AR. Randomised controlled trials. A user’s guide. Available at http://www1.cgmh.org.tw/intr/intr5/c6700/OBGYN/F/Randomized%20tial/chapter7.html. Accessed August 12, 2011.Google Scholar]. However, journals justify the exclusion of this type of article from their contents arguing that they are little cited or continue to publish them albeit acknowledging that their BIF is damaged [1Mahajan R.P. Hunter J.M. Editorial IV. Volume 100: Case reports: should they be confined to the dustbin?.Br J Anaesth. 2008; 100: 744-746Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar, 7Matías-Guiu J. García- Ramos R. The impact factor and editorial decisionsNeurología. 2008; 23: 342-348PubMed Google Scholar, 8Ehara S. Assessing the scientific and educational value of case reports: an editor’s view.Jpn J Radiol. 2011; 29: 1-2Crossref PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar]. Scientific journals exist to cater to patients and health professionals, but not to a number. Occasionally, they should sacrifice their BIF to solve the real problems that afflict the population and health workers who read the journal, although they do not cite it. Let us hope that this comment will not remain as only that, a “case report.”