Impact factor: Do we have to choose between the impact factor and the Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique?;Le facteur d'impact: Ou pour publier faut-il choisir entre la Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique et l'impact factor?

Revue de Chirurgie Orthopedique et Reparatrice de l'Appareil Moteur

Volumn 87, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 115-128

  Dumontier, C ^a   Nizard, R ^b   Sautet, A ^c  

^a INSTITUT DE LA MAIN   (France)

^b HÔPITAL LARIBOISIÈRE   (France)

^c HÔPITAL SAINT ANTOINE   (France)

Author keywords

Bibliometric index; Impact factor; Scientific publications

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; DATA BASE; HOSPITAL PERSONNEL; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLICATION; REVIEW; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIBLIOMETRICS; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; ORTHOPEDICS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0035066538     PISSN: 00351040     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Le facteur d'impact des journaux médicaux: Le jugement de Salomon ou la danse des 7 voiles
2. Impact factors
3. Misleading, unscientific and unjust: The United Kingdom's research assessment exercise
4. Journal impact factor: A brief review
5. The impact factor
6. How can impact factors be improved?
7. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
8. Citation rates and journal impact factors are not suitable for evaluation of research
9. The journal « impact factor »: A misnamed, misleading, misused measure
10. Understanding the JCR: A series
11. Citations and journal impact factors: Questionable indicators of research quality
12. Impact facteur et indexation dans les bases de données bibliographiques. Comparaison des critères de qualité pour les journaux pharmaceutiques
13. Of nobel class: A citation perspective on high impact research authors
14. Region-based citation bias in science
15. Use of citation analysis and other bibliometric methods in evaluation of the quality of research
16. Unscientific practice flourishes in sciences: Impact factor of journals should not be used in research assessment
17. Evaluation of the scientific activity through bibliometric indices
18. The impact factor: A factor of impact or the impact of a (sole) factor? The limits of a bibliometric indicator as a candidate for an instrument to evaluate scientific production
19. Impact factor as a misleading tool in evaluation of medical journals
20. CMAJ's impact factor: Room for recalculation
21. Impact of abstracts and short reports
22. Sprucing up one's impact factor
23. Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factor
24. Journal accused of manipulating impact factor
25. Sprucing up one's impact factor
26. The scientometric weight of 50 nations in 27 science areas, 1989-1993
27. Bibliometric repercussions of adopting English as the sole language for publication
28. Papers vanish in mis-citation black hole
29. Unfamiliar citations breed mistakes
30. English versus Spanish in science evaluation
31. Impact factor as the best operational measure of medical journals
32. Impact of the journal plastic and reconstructive surgery
33. My journal is smaller than your journal
34. Scientific activities in departments of clinical physiology/nuclear medicine in Denmark during the period 1989-1994. A bibliometric analysis of the « impact » and citation frequency
35. Better recognition of orthopedics, traumatology and sports medicine in the system of journal ranking
36. Impact factor limits funding