Journal Rank Indicator Research Articles

Citizen Science and Artificial Intelligence in Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe Projects: Communication and Scientific Impact

The Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe framework programs are the key funding programs for the European Union's policy on innovation, research, and development (R&D&I) in all scientific subject areas. These instruments promote open science by using citizen science as a collaborative methodology and artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology, thereby encouraging public participation and engagement in scientific research. This paradigm shift in the scientific landscape is the impetus for this descriptive and exploratory study analyzing the effectiveness of communication policies and the quality of the dissemination and scientific impact of 28 R&D&I projects developed using citizen science and artificial intelligence, which were selected from the Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) repository. This case study employs a methodological procedure grounded in content analysis and bibliometric indicators to meet four specific objectives: to determine the main formats and channels used in the projects’ communication strategies, as well as which category the projects’ papers fall into; to analyze the effectiveness of the projects’ scientific dissemination using articles published in Scopus according to subject area; to analyze the quality of scientific impact of the 234 articles that the projects produced using the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator; and to evaluate their specific and comparative impact using the standardized indicators Field-weighted citation impact (FWCI) and CiteScore. The findings confirmed that there were substantial differences in terms of the effectiveness of communication and the quality of dissemination and scientific impact among the projects analyzed. In this context, communication science could help efficiently navigate the challenges and opportunities in scientific communication.

RESILIENCIA SOCIOECOLÓGICA: CONCEPTO CLAVE PARA EL ESTUDIO DE LA SUSTENTABILIDAD EN AGROECOSISTEMAS

<p><strong>Background</strong>. In order to achieve food security and sustainability in society, current research focused on the evaluation of socio-ecological resilience (SER) of agroecosystems (AES), applies various methodological frameworks to address challenges arising from climate change and the deterioration of natural resources. <strong>Objective</strong>. To review the state of the art on the concept of socio-ecological resilience to identify and analyze the methodological frameworks, attributes, indicators, and indices applied to measure the degree of resilience currently presented in various AES models. <strong>Methodology</strong>. Publications from 1998 to 2022 were reviewed from the Dialnet, SciELO, Redalyc databases, and the Google Scholar search engine. 62 publications were selected that included the term socio-ecological resilience associated with the words "definition," "concept," "agroecosystem," and "indicators." The criteria considered were the presence or absence of the concept, the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator, as well as clarity and precision. The documents were analyzed with Nvivo 12 Pro software, applying the word frequency analysis technique. <strong>Main Results</strong>. Colombia (18), Mexico (14), the United States (7), and Sweden (5) stand out with the highest number of publications, respectively and the authors Holling (19%) as the main driver of ecological resilience, Folke (16%) emphasized the importance of SER research, Gunderson (10%) pioneered resilience in socio-ecological systems, while Berkes (9.5%) and Walker (9%) excelled in applied SER research. Methodological frameworks that attempted to operationalize the concept were the framework for assessing the management of natural resource systems incorporating sustainability indicators (MESMIS), the resilience approach, the holistic risk index (HRI), and the methodology for assessing socio-ecological resilience (MERS). Furthermore, eight publications that mentioned the term socio-ecological resilience identified its main attributes as external disturbance (21.1%), adaptive capacity (18.4%), self-organization capacity (18.4%), stability domain or attraction (15.8%), and resistance (5.3%). It was also revealed that the most suitable indicators for measuring socio-ecological resilience are dependence on external inputs, organic certification, the presence of drought-tolerant species, vulnerability to extreme climatic events, agrobiodiversity, and levels of productive organization. <strong>Implications</strong>. Deriving suitable attributes and indicators to measure the level of socio-ecological resilience will depend on the political, economic, social, ecological context, and the spatial and temporal scale of the study. <strong>Conclusion</strong>. This review shows evidence on the research efforts carried out by the scientific community to develop methodological frameworks that contribute to assess the SER of the various agricultural production models and particularly, the AES that face greater risks associated with climate change.</p>

What Social Workers Need to Know about Muslims: An Analysis of the Contemporary Social Work Scholarship.

This article analyzes peer-reviewed English-language social work scholarship on Islam and Muslims published between 2011 and 2021. Of these 127 articles, 70 journal venues are represented, and first authors are primarily American (44 percent), followed by British (15 percent) and Canadian (11 percent). A total of 70 journals published studies analyzing data related to Muslims/Islam and social work, with 46 consisting of only one publication between 2011 and 2021. A total of 13 of these journals had a SCImago Journal Rank indicator of over 0.5, and three with rankings over 1.0. The volume of publications was high in 2015 and 2020, in particular. Major themes include faith-aligned and strengths-based approaches, the importance of mosques in the lives of Muslims, the relevance of the hijab in the lives of Muslim women, and the prevalence and impact of sociopolitical stereotypes. The conclusion calls for still greater culturally respectful approaches to the profession that include Islam and Muslim individuals/communities and ensuring that ethics and practice/research continue to evolve in ways that are culturally relevant to diverse communities.

Which journal indicator to consider when submitting a paper on Public Health area?

Abstract Background Each journal metric has a one-of-a-kind algorithm with unique strengths and limitations. This study aims to explore the correlations among the journal metrics of the Public Health, Environmental, and Occupational Health (PHEOH) journals to help inform researchers’ decisions on their publications. Methods We included the first 300 journals listed in the PHEOH area by SCImago. Journal Impact Factor (JIF), SCImago journal rank indicator (SJR), CiteScore (CS), h-index, and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) indexes were obtained for every journal, between 01 August-30 September 2022. We performed bivariate Spearman ranking correlations, with SPSS 26.0. The statistical significance level was p < 0.05. Results There were very strong correlations between JIF&CiteScore (r = 0.831, p < 0.05), SJR & JIF (r = 0.817, p < 0.05), and SJR & SNIP (r = 0.829, p < 0.05). There were strong correlations between JIF & SNIP, CiteScore & SNIP, and SJR & CiteScore (r = 0.760, p < 0.05; r = 0.772, p < 0.05; r = 0.792, p < 0.05 respectively). There was a moderate correlation between the h-index and CiteScore (r = 0.414, p < 0.05); weak correlations between the h-index&JIF (r = 0.263, p < 0.05), and the h-index&SNIP (r = 0.310, p < 0.05). Among the top 50 journals, the correlations between JIF& CiteScore (r = 0.795, p < 0.05), SJR & JIF (r = 0.631, p < 0.05), and SJR&SNIP (r = 0.601, p < 0.05) were strong. Moderate correlations were found between JIF&SNIP (r = 0.593, p < 0.05), CiteScore&SNIP (r = 0.550, p < 0.05), and SJR&CiteScore (r = 0.505, p < 0.05). There were no correlations between h-index&JIF (r = 0.140, p = 0.354), h-index&CiteScore (0.194, p = 0.176), h-index&SNIP (0.055, p = 0.704), and h-index&SJR (r = 0.275, p = 0.053). Conclusions Our study highlights that there is instability in the correlations among mentioned metrics. Journal metrics, especially the h-index, should be carefully evaluated by the researchers before submitting any manuscript to a journal in the PHEOH category. Key messages • Journal metrics are not highly correlated in the public health area. • Researchers should carefully consider all metrics before publication, especially h-index.

Mapping gender and geographic diversity in artificial intelligence research: Editor representation in leading computer science journals.

The growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, particularly radiology, requires its unbiased and fair development and implementation, starting with the constitution of the scientific community. To examine the gender and country distribution among academic editors in leading computer science and AI journals. This cross-sectional study analyzed the gender and country distribution among editors-in-chief, senior, and associate editors in all 75 Q1 computer science and AI journals in the Clarivate Journal Citations Report and SCImago Journal Ranking 2022. Gender was determined using an open-source algorithm (Gender Guesser™), selecting the gender with the highest calibrated probability. Among 4,948 editorial board members, women were underrepresented in all positions (editors-in-chief/senior editors/associate editors: 14%/18%/17%). The proportion of women correlated positively with the SCImago Journal Rank indicator (ρ = 0.329; p = .004). The U.S., the U.K., and China comprised 50% of editors, while Australia, Finland, Estonia, Denmark, the Netherlands, the U.K., Switzerland, and Slovenia had the highest women editor representation per million women population. Our results highlight gender and geographic disparities on leading computer science and AI journal editorial boards, with women being underrepresented in all positions and a disproportional relationship between the Global North and South.

Worldwide and Brazilian scientific publications on Leishmaniasis in the first 19 years of 21st century: a bibliometric study.

Leishmaniasis is a set of tropical diseases widely distributed throughout the world. Publications concerning different aspects of leishmaniasis have shown an increasing trend in recent years, especially in Brazil, where this disease has been under continuous expansion. The present study analyzes the data and assess trends in publications on leishmaniasis in Brazil and worldwide. The bibliometric analysis was performed on the Scopus database, addressing data on scientific publications about leishmaniasis in the first nineteen years of the 21st century. The tendency of the annual number of publications was analyzed by mean of linear regression equations. The literature search identified 19.317 publications. Brazil was the country with the largest number of studies (24.88%). The annual growth rate for Brazilian publications was 4.66%, whereas worldwide publications grew 2.96%. The leading ten international authors contributed to 8.71% of the publications, whereas the ten principal Brazilian authors contributed to 4.31%. The largest collaboration network between authors was between Brazil and the United States. Oswaldo Cruz Foundation occupied the premier position in both worldwide and Brazilian ranking in number of publications. The international journal with the largest number of publications and SCImago Journal Rank indicator was PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. The Journal of Immunology had the highest H-index. Most of the research covered topics related to immunology and molecular biology. The data show relevant characteristics of the scientific production on leishmaniasis and demonstrate the fundamental role played by Brazil in the production of knowledge in this area of study.

How did research article publications on the COVID-19 pandemic progress in the Q1 ranked SCImage index journals in 2020?

Aim: The aim of this paper is to survey the COVID-19 research articles in Q1 ranked high SJR index journals according to the SCImago journal rank indicator.
 Material and Method: The study was carried out on the website named "https://www.scimagojr.com". The search was conducted by selecting the criteria “medicine”, “pathology and forensic medicine”, “all regions/countries”, “journals”, and the “2020” as the year. Only 50 scientific journals met these criteria. COVID-19-related and unrelated research articles published in these journals were manually scanned. Review articles, book reviews, conferences, commentaries, case reports, mini reviews, short communications, letters to the editor were not included in the study. COVID-19 related research articles were divided into groups in terms of antemortem and postmortem type of the study by reviewing the abstract of the studies and also grouped according to the country of first author and countries of all authors. 
 Results: A total of 3906 research articles published in 50 journals with Q1 SJR index over 0.887 were investigated. Of these 3906 research articles, 40 of them were related to COVID-19. 31 of these 40 COVID-19 related research articles were antemortem and 9 were postmortem studies. Among these 40 COVID-19 related scientific articles, the first author of publications belonged to 12 countries. United States, Australia, China, and Italy were found to be the most productive countries for published research articles on COVID-19 in selected high SJR index journals. The United States was the country with the highest number of first authors with 15 articles. China was the country with the highest number of multinational author list research articles.
 Conclusion: We believe that the number and content of studies conducted in these high-quality scientific journals on COVID-19 make important contributions and understanding in the fields of disease transmission, disease prevention, course and severity of symptoms, pathophysiology, molecular characteristics, and treatment approach processes.

Dermatological Research in India: A Brief Bibliometric Analysis of Publications During 1999-2019.

Background:Dermatology is the science of the skin. In India, dermatology came into picture in the twentieth century. Today’s dermatology practiced in India is the modern approach developed and established in western countries based on western medical theory, knowledge, experience, and results from study. Growth of dermatology field in India has progressed since two to three decades. This paper assesses the contributions made by India in the dermatology field by analyzing the total number of publications in top dermatological journals.Materials and Methods:SCImago Journal Rank indicator (2019) was used to search for top dermatology journals and publication metrics was recorded from respective journal websites. Simple statistics tools were used to determine the number of publications during this 20-year period.Results:From 1999 to 2019, there were 547 publications from India, in the top dermatologic journals. It was noted that, original research article contributes maximum number of documents (136). Journal of Dermatology had a maximum number of publications with 174 when compared to other journals. Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh’ had a maximum number of publication (150).Conclusion:The last 20 years have seen a massive increase in the field of dermatology. Today, dermatology is a well-developed field in India. From 1999 to 2019, there is an increase in the trend of publications along with the collaborative publications in the top dermatologic journals. This show the encouraging trend in terms of publications from India in past 20 years.

EP.TU.169Gender Representation in the Authorship of Surgical Journals

Abstract Aims Despite the increase in female doctors graduating from medical schools internationally, gender disparity in surgery remains. This disparity is also evident in academic surgery. This study aims to quantify the extent of gender disparity in the authorship of articles in major surgical journals. Methods The Top 10 Surgical Journals were identified using SCImago Journal Rank indicator. Authorship details for papers published in 2019 were collected. Authors were assigned as female, male or unknown using Gender API software (Gender API, Germany). For each journal, the percentage of first author, last author, corresponding author and all authors split by gender was interrogated. Gender differences by publication type were also identified. Results 9 of the 10 journals had full names publicly available. Overall, 2414 manuscripts were interrogated which included 16,277 number of authors. Respectively, females and males accounted for 29.8% [22.9-34.9%] (N = 655) and 62.4% [56.3-70.2%] (N = 1419) of first authors, 20.6% [11.8-27.1%] (N = 453) and 74.2% [65.6-84.1%] (N = 1706) of last authors, 23.9% [14.9-29.6%] (N = 510) and 69.9% [60.5-79.3%] (N = 2341) of corresponding authors and in total 27% [19.4-31.6%] (N = 4298) and 65.5% [58.6-73.4%] (N = 9982) of all authors. The wide range in these results could be due to various factors. Conclusion This study has identified a gender imbalance in authorship positions, with the greatest difference observed in the most senior author position. Whether this is reflective of the current disparity observed in senior academic surgery positions or due to gender discrimination is unclear.

1289 Gender Representation in The Authorship of Surgical Journals

Abstract Introduction Despite the increase in female doctors graduating from medical schools internationally, gender disparity in surgery remains. This disparity is also evident in academic surgery. This study aims to quantify the extent of gender disparity in the authorship of articles in major surgical journals. Method The Top 10 Surgical Journals were identified using SCImago Journal Rank indicator. Authorship details for papers published in 2019 were collected. Authors were assigned as female, male or unknown using Gender API software (Gender API, Germany). For each journal, the percentage of first author, last author, corresponding author and all authors split by gender was interrogated. Gender differences by publication type were also identified. Results 9 of the 10 journals had full names publicly available. Overall, 2414 manuscripts were interrogated which included 16,277 number of authors. Respectively, females and males accounted for 29.8% [22.9-34.9%] (N = 655) and 62.4% [56.3-70.2%] (N = 1419) of first authors, 20.6% [11.8-27.1%] (N = 453) and 74.2% [65.6-84.1%] (N = 1706) of last authors, 23.9% [14.9-29.6%] (N = 510) and 69.9% [60.5-79.3%] (N = 2341) of corresponding authors and in total 27% [19.4-31.6%] (N = 4298) and 65.5% [58.6-73.4%] (N = 9982) of all authors. The wide range in these results could be a result of various factors. Conclusions This study has identified a gender imbalance in authorship positions, with the greatest difference observed in the most senior author position. Whether this is reflective of the current disparity observed in senior academic surgery positions or due to gender discrimination is unclear.

O45 Gender representation in the authorship of surgical journals

Abstract Introduction Despite the increase in female doctors graduating from medical schools internationally, gender disparity in surgery remains. This disparity is also evident in academic surgery. This study aims to quantify the extent of gender disparity in the authorship of articles in major surgical journals. Method The Top 10 Surgical Journals were identified using SCImago Journal Rank indicator. Authorship details for papers published in 2019 were collected. Authors were assigned as female, male or unknown using Gender API software (Gender API, Germany). For each journal, the percentage of first author, last author, corresponding author and all authors split by gender was interrogated. Gender differences by publication type were also identified. Result 9 of the 10 journals had full names publicly available. Overall, 2414 manuscripts were interrogated which included 16,277 number of authors. Respectively, females and males accounted for 29.8% [22.9–34.9%] (N = 655) and 62.4% [56.3–70.2%] (N = 1419) of first authors, 20.6% [11.8–27.1%] (N = 453) and 74.2% [65.6–84.1%] (N = 1706) of last authors, 23.9% [14.9–29.6%] (N = 510) and 69.9% [60.5–79.3%] (N = 2341) of corresponding authors and in total 27% [19.4–31.6%] (N = 4298) and 65.5% [58.6–73.4%] (N = 9982) of all authors. The wide range in these results could be a result of various factors. Conclusion This study has identified a gender imbalance in authorship positions, with the greatest difference observed in the most senior author position. Whether this is reflective of the current disparity observed in senior academic surgery positions or due to gender discrimination is unclear. Take-home Message This study identified a gender imbalance in authorship positions of major surgical journals, which has implications for women who choose to pursue a career in academic surgery.

Publication Model, Ownership and Impact of the Top Endocrinology Journals

Background: Subscription-based (SB) is the traditional publication model for peer-reviewed research; however, open-access (OA) models have been rising in popularity in recent years. Journals may be owned by commercial, professional society, university or government publishers. SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator is a measure of the scientific influence of scholarly journals.Objectives: The purpose of this study is to assess the publication model, ownership and SJR indicator of the top Endocrinology journals. This will help inform researchers’ decisions when selecting a journal to submit their work to.Methods: The SCImagoJR website was used to obtain a database of active, peer-reviewed Endocrinology journals worldwide. Publishers were grouped by parent company and categorized as commercial, professional society, university or government. Journals were searched on the National Library of Medicine catalogue to determine whether they are indexed on MEDLINE. Data was analyzed using IBM Statistics version 25. Fischer’s exact test was performed to assess the distribution of publication model and indexing status. Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to assess the distribution of SJR.Results: 207 Endocrinology journals were included; 134 SB (64.73%) and 73 OA (35.27%). 122 journals are indexed in MEDLINE. The top three publishers of Endocrinology journals are Elsevier, Springer Nature and Wiley, all of which are commercial entities. They collectively own 91/207 (43.96%) Endocrinology journals and 70/122 (57.38%) MEDLINE-indexed journals. The top three publishers own more SB than OA journals, though this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.080). There was no significant difference in the distribution of indexing status across the top three publishers (p = 0.250) and the four publisher types (p = 0.928). There were significantly more SB than OA journals indexed in MEDLINE (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the distribution of SJR indicator across the top three publishers (p = 0.283) and publisher types (p = 0.873) (see Table 1). SB journals had significantly higher SJR indicators compared to OA journals (all journals, p = 0.002; indexed journals only, p = 0.013).CONCLUSIONS: Endocrinology journals are largely controlled by a few commercial entities and are primarily SB. Compared to OA, SB journals have significantly higher SJR indicators, meaning they are more influential. This is an important consideration for researchers when considering where to submit their work.

Gender distribution among surgical journals’ editorial boards: Empowering women surgeon scientists

BackgroundGender disparities still exist in the field of academic surgery. Women face additional obstacles obtaining high-ranking, surgical academia positions compared to men, and this may extend to the appointment of editorial board members. We aim to evaluate the gender distribution of editorial board members, associate editors, and editors-in-chief of top US surgical journals and to recommend interventions, which can promote equitable gender representation among editorial boards. MethodsThe study is a cross-sectional analysis using publicly available data regarding the number and proportion of female editorial board members, associate editors, and editors-in-chief from 42 US surgical journals. Descriptive statistics and linear regression were performed with significance defined as P < .05. ResultsOf 2,836 editorial board members from 42 US surgical journals, 420 (14.8%) were women. Of 881 associate editors, 118 (13.3%) were women. Only 2/42 (4.8%) of editors-in-chief were women. The mean proportions of female editorial board members and associate editors were 14.5% and 19.5%, respectively. No significant associations were found between the 2019 Scimago Journal & Country Rank indicator nor the 2019 impact factor and the proportion of female editorial board members and female associate editors after adjusting for author H-index. ConclusionGender disparities are evident in academic surgery, and women comprise a minority of US surgical editorial board members, associate editors, and editors-in-chief. The implementation of women mentorship from senior faculty on behalf of senior residents and junior faculty, as well as journal-facilitated pipeline programs, can diversify editorial board members by increasing women representation and reduce disparities in surgical journal editorial boards.

Which journal ranking list? A case study in business and economics

PurposeWith over 3,000 academic journals in the fields of Business and Economics, most academics face a hard time selecting an adequate journal to submit their work to. In today's demanding academic environment and with the presence of different journal ranking lists (JRLs), the selection becomes more difficult when considering employment, promotion and funding. The purpose of this paper is to explore key differences among multiple JRLs pertinent to the latter common objectives. An extensive analysis is conducted to compare the content of journals in the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality list, Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) in the fields of Business and Economics. Then, a case of a university with medium research output is considered where scholarly performance evaluation is based on the ABDC Journal Quality List.Design/methodology/approachAfter ranking journals in the fields of Business and Economics based on SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator, JCR's Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and JCR's Eigenfactor (EF), a methodology is proposed to categorize journals in the three JRLs into the same categorization adopted by ABDC. The latter establishes a way to compare the four JRLs under consideration and serves as a basis to compare and analyze the content of journals in the ABDC Journal Quality list, Scopus and WoS. As a proxy impact metric, a normalized citation count is associated with each article based on Google Scholar. The publications of the considered university are then evaluated from the perspective of the four JRLs in terms of citation-based impact and quality while considering the exposure to popular world university ranking tables.FindingsFor journals classified under fourth tier by ABDC, over 53 and 59% are not indexed by Scopus and WoS, respectively. In this case study, over 42% of the publications appear in journals that are not listed in JCR despite the fact that over 94% of them are listed by the SJR list. Generally, publications that appear in journals listed by JCR achieve, on a yearly average, significantly higher citation rates when compared to those that appear in journals listed in ABDC and SJR Lists.Originality/valueA four-tier mapping is proposed for consistent comparison among JRLs. Normalized citation count associated with each article based on Google Scholar is employed for evaluation. The findings provide recommendations for scholars, administrators and global universities, including Euro-Med Universities, on which JRL can be more influential for both faculty development and positioning of the university.

Association Between Sex Composition and Publication Productivity of Journal Editorial and Professional Society Board Members in Ophthalmology

Because women remain underrepresented in leadership positions in medicine, including ophthalmology, knowledge of sex composition of ophthalmic journal editorial and professional society boards seems warranted. To investigate the sex composition of ophthalmic journal editorial and professional society boards and compare the publication productivity and number of citations of male vs female board members. In this cross-sectional study, the SCImago Journal Rank indicator was used to identify the 20 highest-ranked ophthalmology journals. Faculty members from each ophthalmic subspecialty were surveyed within a US academic ophthalmology department to identify 15 influential ophthalmology societies. The 2018 board members of each journal and society were identified from the journals' and societies' official websites, and the sex of each individual was recorded. Information regarding journals and societies was collected from October 1 to December 31, 2018. The Scopus database was accessed in January 2019 and then used to find each member's h-index and m-quotient. The h-index, defined as the highest number of an author's publications that received at least h number of citations, was calculated for each board member. The m-quotient, which accounts for varying lengths of academic careers, was calculated by dividing the h-index by the number of years since first publication. Of the 1077 members of ophthalmic journal editorial and society leadership boards, 797 (74.0%) were men and 280 (26.0%) were women. Among the 24 editors in chief of the 20 journals investigated, 23 (95.8%) were male. Thirteen of the 15 professional society presidents (86.7%) were men. Male board members had significantly higher median h-indexes (male vs female journals: 34 [interquartile range {IQR}, 23-47] vs 28 [IQR, 19-40], P < .001; male vs female societies: 27 [IQR, 15-41] vs 17 [IQR, 8-32], P = .006), median publication numbers (male vs female journal board members: 157 [IQR, 88-254] vs 109 [IQR, 66-188], P < .001; male vs female society board members: 109 [IQR, 57-190] vs 58 [IQR, 28-139, P = .001), and median citations (male vs female journal board members: 4027 [IQR, 1897-8005] vs 2871 [IQR, 1344-5852], P < .001; male vs female society board members: 2228 [IQR, 1005-5069] vs 1090 [IQR, 410-2527], P = .003). However, the median m-quotients for male and female board members were comparable (male vs female journal board members: 1.2 [IQR, 0.8-1.6] vs 1.1 [IQR, 0.8-1.5], P = .54; male vs female society board members: 1.0 [IQR, 0.7-1.4] vs 0.9 [IQR, 0.6-1.3], P = .32). The findings suggest that the sex composition on journal editorial and professional society boards in ophthalmology is consistent with the sex composition of ophthalmologists in the US, as reported by the Association of American Colleges, but that editor in chief and society president positions are male dominated despite the apparent equality in academic productivity.

2982 Gastroenterology Journal Prestige and Impact: Analysis of Journal Rankings

INTRODUCTION: Scientific research is critical to the progression of the field of gastroenterology. Journals are given impact factor ratings annually to determine the utilization and citation of their published articles. The rankings of gastroenterology journals have not been investigated. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of gastroenterology journals from 2010 to 2017. Ranking scores from the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator, a composite score of impact factor, prestige, and closeness of citing articles. The top twenty journals in gastroenterology and hepatology were included and compared to the top ten journals in cardiovascular disease, general internal medicine, and general surgery. RESULTS: The number of gastroenterology journals increased from 134 to 143 in this time period. The top ten journals were Gastroenterology, Gut, Journal of Hepatology, American Journal of Gastroenterology, Alimentary Pharmacology &amp; Therapeutics, Liver Cancer, Natural Clinical Practice Gastroenterology, Clinical Gastroenterology &amp; Hepatology, and Journal Crohn’s and Colitis. Gastroenterology rankings increased from an average of 2.61 to 4.82 (185% increase), compared to a 322% increase and 254% increase in cardiovascular disease and general internal medicine, respectively. The percentage increase per year was significantly lower than similar increase in cardiovascular disease and general internal medicine journals (P &lt; 0.05 for all years). CONCLUSION: Gastroenterology journals lag in citation and prestige compared to other major internal medicine fields. The reasons for this diminished impact should be investigated, and journals should explore mechanisms to disseminate research effectively and improve outreach.

Enfermería Nefrológica y su posición en el SCimago Journal &amp; Country Rank (SJR)

El SCImago Journal &amp; Country Rank es el portal de evaluación de revistas científicas basado en la información contenida en la Base de Datos Scopus (Elsevier)1. La plataforma debe su nombre al SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) Indicator, desarrollado por el grupo de investigación Scimago. El indicador SJR se realiza sobre el cálculo de las citas recibidas por las revistas en un periodo de 3 años, otorgando un peso mayor a las citas procedentes de revistas de alto prestigio y restringe las autocitas para que sólo constituyan el 33% del cómputo2. Es decir, el SJR de 2018 corresponde a las citas recogidas en ese año, de los artículos publicados en los años 2015, 2016 y 2017. Ni que decir tiene que este índice es el más importante que recibe Enfermería Nefrológica a nivel internacional, dentro de la materia Enfermería y la categoría Enfermería Avanzada y Especializada.

Evaluating journal quality : A review of journal citation indicators and ranking in library and information science core journals

The main objective of this study is to evaluate the influence and quality of library and Information Science journals. Currently used bibliometric indicators include: Journal Impact Factor (JIF), Eigenfactor Score (ES), SCImago Journal Rank indicator (SJR), Cite Score (CS), and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) indicator rank. Specific library and Information Science journals were collected from their class within Web of Science. JIFs and ESs were composed of Journal Citation Report and the SJR, Cite Score and SNIP from the SCOPUS, SCImago Journal, and country rank website respectively.The researchers randomly selected and examined eighty-nine Library and Information Science journals detailed with necessary data derived from the principal and original sites as related to JIF, ES, SJR, CS and SNIP quality ranking indexes. Correlations amid meters were explained by Pearson’s and Spearman’s statistical correlations employing SPSS 23.0 package. Concerning Spearman’s rho statistical correlation, a high correlation was observed between JIF and ES rank (coefficient value of 0.843) for Information Science journals and a lesser value between JIF and SJR rank (coefficient value of 0.759) and a rather low correlation between both JIF and SNIP rank (coefficient value = 0.618). An overall Journal Quality Index is proposed to utilise the potentiality of all various indicators used for measuring journal quality.

Correlation Between Cost of Publication and Journal Impact. Comprehensive Cross-sectional Study of Exclusively Open-Access Surgical Journals

As open-access journals have become increasingly common, it has provided more options for researchers to publish their work and improved access of information to the public. However, some open-access journals charge the authors processing fee on submission. In certain cases, this can be rather expensive. This study is the first study to specifically assess the cost of publishing in exclusively open-access, peer-reviewed surgical journals, and their correlation with journal impact, in the form of 6 bibliometrics. This is a cross-sectional study. A list of journals is compiled using the SCImago Journal & Country Rank and Directory of Open Access Journals. 6 indices are measured - impact factor, SCOPUS h-index, SCImago journal rank indicator (SJR), Eigenfactor, Article Influence Score and Google h5 index. The cost of publication (in USD$) of a research article (maximum of 6 pages) is used as a baseline. 89 research journals are included. The median cost of publication is USD$100 (range [0-2580]). 47% are free of charge. 13% can cost more than USD$2000 per article. SJR and Google h5 index appear to be the only indices that correlate linearly with the cost (p = 0.015 and 0.041, respectively), although the correlations are weak. 3 indices, namely impact factor, SJR and Article Influence Score appear to have very strong correlations with each other (Pearson coefficient > 0.90). From this study, the cost of publishing in open-access journals bears little correlation to their impact; this poses a dilemma for researchers without significant funding. Therefore, authors and funders must consider cautiously when submitting to these journals.

Dissemination of novel biostatistics methods: Impact of programming code availability and other characteristics on article citations

BackgroundAs statisticians develop new methodological approaches, there are many factors that influence whether others will utilize their work. This paper is a bibliometric study that identifies and quantifies associations between characteristics of new biostatistics methods and their citation counts. Of primary interest was the association between numbers of citations and whether software code was available to the reader.MethodsStatistics journal articles published in 2010 from 35 statistical journals were reviewed by two biostatisticians. Generalized linear mixed models were used to determine which characteristics (author, article, and journal) were independently associated with citation counts (as of April 1, 2017) in other peer-reviewed articles.ResultsOf 722 articles reviewed, 428 were classified as new biostatistics methods. In a multivariable model, for articles that were not freely accessible on the journal’s website, having code available appeared to offer no boost to the number of citations (adjusted rate ratio = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.24, p = 0.74); however, for articles that were freely accessible on the journal’s website, having code available was associated with a 2-fold increase in the number of citations (adjusted rate ratio = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.30 to 3.10, p = 0.002). Higher citation rates were also associated with higher numbers of references, longer articles, SCImago Journal Rank indicator (SJR), and total numbers of publications among authors, with the strongest impact on citation rates coming from SJR (rate ratio = 1.21 for a 1-unit increase in SJR; 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.32).ConclusionThese analyses shed new insight into factors associated with citation rates of articles on new biostatistical methods. Making computer code available to readers is a goal worth striving for that may enhance biostatistics knowledge translation.