Life and times of the impact factor: Retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine

Volumn 100, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 142-150

  Chew, Mabel ^a   Villanueva, Elmer V ^b,c   Van Der Weyden, Martin B ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b National Breast Cancer Centre   (Australia)

^c MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^d NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; EDITOR; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; LIFESTYLE; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

EID: 34147132743     PISSN: 01410768     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/jrsm.100.3.142     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Garfield E. Citation indexes to science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science 1955;122:108-11
2. Garfield E. How can impact factors be improved? BMJ 1996;313:411-3
3. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 1997;314:498-502
4. Abbasi K. Let's dump impact factors. BMJ 2004;329
5. Science and innovation investment framework 2004-2014: next steps. Available at http: //www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/1E1/5E/bud06_science_332.pdf (accessed 27/01/2007)
6. ISI Web of Knowledge. Journal Citation Reports. Available at: http: //isiknowledge.com (accessed 27/01/2007)
7. King N. Template Analysis. Available at http: //www.hud.ac.uk/hhs/ research/template_analysis/intro.htm (accessed 27/01/2007)
8. Phillips DP, Kanter EJ, Bednarczyk B, Tastad PL. Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community. N Engl J Med 1991;325:1180-3
9. Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber E. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 2002;287:2847-50
10. Lawrence S. Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature 2001;411:521
11. Tenopir C, King DW, Bush A. Medical faculty's use of print and electronic journals: changes over time and in comparison with scientists. J Med Libr Assoc 2004;92:233-41
12. Joseph KS. Quality of impact factors of general medical journals. BMJ 2003;326:283
13. Joseph KS, Hoey J. CMAJ's impact factor: room for recalculation. CMAJ 1999;161:977-8
14. [No authors listed.] Errors in citation statistics. Nature 2002;415:101
15. Hopkins KD, Gollogly L, Ogden S, Horton R. Strange results mean it's worth checking ISI data. Nature 2002;415:732
16. Opthof T. Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardiovasc Res 1997;33:1-7
17. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA 2006;295:90-3
18. Walter G, Bloch S, Hunt G, Fisher K. Counting on citations: a flawed way to measure quality. Med J Aust 2003;178:280-1
19. Patsopoulos NA, Analatos AA, Ioannidis JP. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. JAMA 2005;293:2362-6
20. Nakayama T, Fukui T, Fukuhara S, et al. Comparison between impact factors and citations in evidence-based practice guidelines. JAMA 2003;290:755-6
21. Joyce J, Rabe-Hesketh S, Wessely S. Reviewing the reviews: the example of chronic fatigue syndrome. JAMA 1998;280:264-6
22. Moed HF and van Leeuwen TN. Impact factors can mislead. Nature 1996;381:186
23. Gami AS, Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. Author self-citation in the diabetes literature. CMAJ 2004;170:1925-7
24. Smith R. Journal accused of manipulating impact factor. BMJ 1997;314:461
25. Garfield E, Welljams-Dorof A. Language use in international research: a citation analysis. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 1990;511:10-24
26. Van Leeuwen TN, Moed HF, Tijssen RW, et al. Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics 2001;51:335-46
27. BMJ Updates. Available at http: //bmjupdates.mcmaster.ca (accessed 27/01/2007)
28. Biology Reports Ltd: Faculty of 1000. What is Faculty of 1000? London: BioMed Central. Available at http: //www.f1000biology.com/about/system (accessed 27/01/2007)
29. Council for Medical Sciences, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. The Societal Impact of Applied Health Research: Towards A Quality Assessment System. Available at http://www.knaw.nl/publicaties/pdf/20021098. pdf (accessed 27/01/2007)
30. Glänzel W, Moed HF. Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics 2002;53:171-93
31. Mays N, Pope C. Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 2000;320:50-2