Sum Of Impact Factors Research Articles

Abstract TP76: The Impact Of Registries In Stroke Literature

Introduction: Registries represent a main source of data to the advances in medical literature. In stroke medicine, they serve as key points of discussion and elaboration for future clinical trials, as well as evaluation tools for several treatment modalities in different patient populations. We performed an analysis of recent stroke registries to evaluate their impact in literature. Methods: We performed PubMed and Google Scholar search using keywords with Boolean operators to identify studies deriving from stroke registries between January 2000 and June 2021. All registries identified were further characterized regarding study design, sample size, number of centers, number of peer reviewed articles or conference abstracts originating from it, with their respective number of citations and impact factor of journals. Results: A total of 51 registries were identified, comprising 43584 patients. Forty-three (84.3%) were prospective. Forty-five (88.2%) were multicenter. Sixteen (31.4%) focused in a specific device for mechanical thrombectomy. Twenty-seven (52.9%) were registered on clinicaltrials.gov. The most participating countries were United States in 16 (31.4%) and Germany in 8 (15.7%). Twenty-seven (52.9%) registries originated a total of 295 peer-reviewed articles, 6841 citations and a sum of impact factors of 1282.8. The median impact factor of journals publishing articles from registries was 5.51 (interquartile range, 3.27-7.91). The median number of citations per article was 13 (interquartile range, 4-37). Between registered and unregistered registries, there was no significant difference in the median number of publications (P=0.08), citations (P=0.158) or impact factor (P=0.124). Between registries specific and unspecific to a certain device, there was no significant difference in median number of publications (P=1.67), citations (P=0.631) or impact factor (P=0.509). Conclusions: Stroke registries provide a meaningful data source for literature regardless of registration or specificity to a certain device, and represent a key mechanism in the advances of stroke care. Contribution to stroke registries are key mechanism to elucidate clinical questions that require large sample size and should be incentivized.

Temporal trend, geographic distribution, and publication quality in asbestos research.

Asbestos is a well-known cause of cancer and respiratory diseases. The aim of the current study was to investigate the scientific production in asbestos research evaluating temporal trend, geographic distribution, impact factor (IF) of published literature, and taking into account socioeconomic variables. The PubMed database was searched starting from 1970. Publication numbers and IF were evaluated as absolute values and after standardization by population and gross domestic product (GDP). Six thousand nine hundred seven articles related to asbestos were retrieved. Publications grew steeply in the 1970s, leveled off in the 1980s, decreased in the 1990s, and then increased again. Mesothelioma, lung neoplasms, and occupational diseases are the most commonly used keywords. In the period of 1988-2011, 4220 citations were retrieved, 3187 of whom had an impact factor. The US, Italy, and the UK were the most productive countries. European countries published about 20 % more asbestos-related articles than the US, although the latter reached a higher mean IF, ranking second after Australia. When the national scientific production (sum of IF) was compared taking into account socioeconomic variables, Australia and Scandinavian countries performed very well, opposite to all main asbestos producers like Russia, China, and Brazil (except for Canada). The American Journal of Industrial Medicine and the Italian La Medicina del Lavoro published the highest numbers of articles. This study provides the first bibliometric analysis of scientific production in asbestos research. Interest appears to be higher in selected countries, with strong national features, and is growing again in the new millennium.

The impact factor-based quality assessment of biomedical research institutes in Iran: effect of impact factor normalization by subject.

The journal impact factor is increasingly employed to evaluate the quality of scientific research. This is in contrary to its critical limitations, e.g., its marked variation across scientific disciplines. This study was conducted to describe, in both quantitative and qualitative terms, the contribution of Iranian universities and research institutes to biomedical publications in 2004 and to examine the possible effect of impact factor normalization by subject on their rankings. The Iranian biomedical articles were recruited from Thomson Science Citation Index Expanded and PubMed databases according to Thomson Scientific subject categorization of journals. Three subject-normalized impact factors were employed: rank-normalized impact factor, journal to field impact score, and standardized impact factor. Tehran and Shiraz Universities of Medical Sciences and University of Tehran were the top three institutes regarding the sum of impact factor in 2004. On the basis of the mean crude impact factor, Sharif University of Technology, University of Shiraz, and Baqiyatollah University were ranked as the first to third. However, the subject normalization of impact factor made some considerable changes in impact factor-based rankings of research institutes. The Iranian scientific community and science development policy makers are recommended to employ subject-normalized impact factor, rather than crude impact factor, in quality assessment of biomedical research held in various academic and research institutes.

Some bibliometric indexes for members of the Scientific Association of Animal Production (ASPA)

This study calculated several bibliometric indexes to analyze the scientific output of 363 members of the Scientific Association of Animal Production (ASPA) in Italy, based on their publications listed by ISI-Thompson, Web of Science database (search period from 1989 until 2006). Five main research areas were considered: AGR/17 (Animal genetics and breeding), AGR/18 (Animal nutrition and feeding), AGR/19 (Animal husbandry), AGR/20 (Poultry, rabbits and fish production) and External researcher (Ere). Position groups were: FP (Full Professor), AP (Associate Professor), Re (Researcher), EReUni (scientists working temporarily at the University or professors of an area different from AGR/17-20), and EReInst (scientists working at other institutions). Each institution was classified according to three geographical areas of Italy: North, Centre and South. Main calculated bibliometric indexes were: Ni = total number of papers published by member i over yi years; yi = number of years publishing of member i; Ci. = total number of citations of member i; IFpersonal. = Ci./Ni, Personal Impact factor of member i; Total IFjournal. = Sum of impact factor reported by the ISI-Thompson database of the journal in which a paper of member i was published (Journal Citation Reports Science Edition, 2004); Mean IFjournal. = Mean impact factor of all papers published in journals having a recognized IFjournal. by the ISI-Thompson database for member i; h = number of papers with at least h citations; m = h/y, i.e. average increase of h over the yi years publishing; and a = Ci./h2. Among the studied bibliometric indexes, Ni, Ci., Total IFjournal. and h are reliable, while IFpersonal. and Mean IFjournal. are not, to evaluate the scientific career of Animal Scientists in Italy. FP and members of AGR/17 tend to show the highest values of bibliometric indexes. Most ASPA members work in the North of Italy, which shows the highest median and highest percentage of scientists with maximum values for most bibliometric parameters. The scientific system of Animal Science in Italy has a fairly good degree of internationalization, but greater efforts should be made to increase the productivity and impact of Animal Scientists.

The origin and features of information referenced in pharmaceutical patents

50 pharmaceutical patents granted to firms, residing in US, GB, DE and HU each, were surveyed and the average numbers of scientific as well as patent itemsReferenced by the inventors were calculated. The sum of impact factors of the journals referenced (Total Weighted Impact) was calculated by scientific fields. About 50–60 per cent of scientific information referred to in the patents was found to originate from Life Sciences journals. It was found that 10 per cent of the journals referenced contained 55 per cent of the papers.