Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals
- PMID: 12038930
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.287.21.2847
Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals
Abstract
Context: Citation by other authors is important in the dissemination of published science, but factors predicting it are little studied.
Methods: To identify characteristics of published research predicting citation in other journals, we searched the Science Citations Index database for a standardized 3.5 years for all citations of published articles originally submitted to a 1991 emergency medicine specialty meeting. Analysis was conducted by classification and regression trees, a nonparametric modeling technique of regression trees, to determine the impact of previously determined characteristics of the full articles on the outcome measures. We calculated the the number of times an article was cited each year and calculated the mean impact factor (citations per manuscript per year) in other citing journals.
Results: Of the 493 submitted manuscripts, 204 published articles met entry criteria. The mean citations per year was 2.04 (95% confidence interval, 1.6-2.4; range, 0-20.9) in 440 different journals. Nineteen articles (9.3%) were never cited. The ability to predict the citations per year was weak (pseudo R(2) = 0.14.). The strongest predictor of citations per year was the impact factor of the original publishing journal. The presence of a control group, the subjective newsworthiness score, and sample size predicted citation frequency (24.3%, 26.0%, and 26.5% as strongly, respectively). The ability to predict mean impact factor of the citing journals was even weaker (pseudo R(2) = 0.09). The impact factor of the publishing journal was the strongest predictor, followed by the newsworthiness score (89.9% as strongly) and a subjective quality score (61.5%). Positive outcome bias was not evident for either outcome measure.
Conclusion: In this cohort of published research, commonly used measures of study methodology and design did not predict the frequency of citations or the importance of citing journals. Positive outcome bias was not evident. The impact factor of the original publishing journal was more important than any other variable, suggesting that the journal in which a study is published may be as important as traditional measures of study quality in ensuring dissemination.
Similar articles
-
Impact Factors and Prediction of Popular Topics in a Journal.Ultraschall Med. 2016 Aug;37(4):343-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-111209. Epub 2016 Aug 4. Ultraschall Med. 2016. PMID: 27490462 English.
-
Citation characteristics of research published in Emergency Medicine versus other scientific journals.Ann Emerg Med. 2001 Nov;38(5):513-7. doi: 10.1067/mem.2001.114318. Ann Emerg Med. 2001. PMID: 11679862
-
The distribution of forensic journals, reflections on authorship practices, peer-review and role of the impact factor.Forensic Sci Int. 2007 Jan 17;165(2-3):115-28. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.05.013. Epub 2006 Jun 19. Forensic Sci Int. 2007. PMID: 16784827 Review.
-
Impact factors of forensic science and toxicology journals: what do the numbers really mean?Forensic Sci Int. 2003 Apr 23;133(1-2):1-8. doi: 10.1016/s0379-0738(03)00042-2. Forensic Sci Int. 2003. PMID: 12742682
-
Predictors of citations in the urological literature.BJU Int. 2011 Jun;107(12):1876-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.10028.x. Epub 2011 Feb 18. BJU Int. 2011. PMID: 21332629 Review.
Cited by
-
Academic impact of qualitative studies in healthcare: bibliometric analysis.PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e57371. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057371. Epub 2013 Mar 13. PLoS One. 2013. PMID: 23516404 Free PMC article.
-
Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials published in Intensive Care Medicine from 2001 to 2010.Intensive Care Med. 2013 Aug;39(8):1386-95. doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-2947-3. Epub 2013 Jun 7. Intensive Care Med. 2013. PMID: 23743522 Review.
-
Every scientist is a memory researcher: Suggestions for making research more memorable.F1000Res. 2015 Jan 22;4:19. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.6053.1. eCollection 2015. F1000Res. 2015. PMID: 25789161 Free PMC article.
-
Whose research benefits more from Twitter? On Twitter-worthiness of communication research and its role in reinforcing disparities of the field.PLoS One. 2022 Dec 12;17(12):e0278840. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278840. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 36508423 Free PMC article.
-
Author self-citation in the diabetes literature.CMAJ. 2004 Jun 22;170(13):1925-7; discussion 1929-30. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1031879. CMAJ. 2004. PMID: 15210641 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous