Journal metrics of the top-ranked Orthopaedic, Medical, and Surgical journals - A cross-sectional, comparative study.

PURPOSE: In academic publishing, research metrics play a crucial role in assessing the scientific impact and performance of the published literature, as well as of the journals in which they are published. Several journal-level metrics (JLM) such as the h-index of the analysed journals, total citations, total documents, citable documents, references and external citations per document are considered crucial indicators of the importance and reputation of the journals. We hypothesize that journals in the field of Medicine receive more citations than those in Surgical journals like Orthopaedic surgery, and hence have better JLM. This study aims to to assess and compare the JLM of Medical and Surgical journals between two time zones 2017-2019 vs. 2020-2022, i.e., pre and post-COVID-19 pandemic period. METHODS: A cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of the top-ranked Orthopaedic, Medical, and Surgical journals was undertaken based on traditional JLM, using the SCImago database from 2017 to 2022. Our analysis focused on identifying trends in the h-index of the analysed journals, total citations, total documents, citable documents, references and external citations per document. RESULTS: Overall Medical journals were found to have higher JLM than the Surgical and Orthopaedic journals. The h-index of Surgical journals, Medical journals and Orthopaedic journals were comparable between the two periods (pre and -post-COVID-19 pandemic); Total Cites (3 years), total documents (2017), total documents (3 years), total references, and citable documents (3 years) of Surgical journals, Medical journals and Orthopaedic journals were significantly higher in the period 2020-2022. CONCLUSION: There has been a steady increase in the number of publications from post COVID-19 period. Medical journals have higher JLM than Surgical and Orthopaedic journals. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Am), Annals of Surgery and Diabetes Care were the most published journals in Orthopaedics, General Surgery and Medicine-related topics respectively.

21st anniversary of job embeddedness: A retrospection and future research agenda.

BACKGROUND: Since the previous decade, researchers and academics have paid close attention to studying job embeddedness (JE), but the bibliometric examination of JE has not yet been explored. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to provide general information on the trends of the studies on JE as well as an overall perspective on the development of this topic by utilising a bibliometric analytic approach. METHOD: A bibliometric evaluation was conducted in the JE field since the first publication was documented in the Scopus database. The information retrieved examines 1572 JE papers from a variety of perspectives, including citation and publishing metrics. RESULTS: The research results pinpoint the most productive countries, universities, journals, authors, and JE articles. The study also classified the most important themes and offered some recommendations for further research. CONCLUSION: The study provided a snapshot of JE patterns and trajectories from 1993 to 2020, which can help academics and practitioners figure out the pattern and direction of future research. To the best of our knowledge, no other study examines the bibliographic data on JE and thus this work is one of the first contributions to the literature.

Optometry research in Spain: Topics of interest, institutions and investigators

Purpose: To determine the institutions, journals of choice and topics of investigation of the most prolific and highly cited Spanish optometrist researchers.Methods: As a primary search strategy, the Scopus database (Elsevier) was queried with the terms (optometr* OR "contact lens*" OR refracti* OR *ocular) and the affiliation country filter “Spain”. The list of authors returned by the primary search was used in a secondary manual search based on co-authors and institutions. Authors were included in the analysis if they had an h-index > 10, were of Spanish nationality, were affiliated to Spanish institutions, and possessed an optometry degree. Authors were ranked by h-index, number of publications and number of citations. Topics of research interest and target journals were determined by analyzing the 10 most highly cited papers of each author.Results: A total of 32 authors with an h-index > 10 were identified, of whom 14 (43.7%) were female. Only one author had an h-index > 40, and 7 (21.9%) authors had an h-index over 20. The Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery was the first journal of choice (19.1% of highest cited papers), followed by Optometry and Vision Science (10.3%). The Universidad Complutense de Madrid hosted the largest percentage of authors (18.7%), followed by the Universitat de València (15.6%). Main topics of research interest were topography (6.5% of papers), cornea (6.2%) and contact lens (5.0%).Conclusion: Optometry in Spain is a fertile field of research, with an increasing number of highly cited authors publishing in high impact journals. (AU)

Optometry research in Spain: Topics of interest, institutions and investigators.

PURPOSE: To determine the institutions, journals of choice and topics of investigation of the most prolific and highly cited Spanish optometrist researchers. METHODS: As a primary search strategy, the Scopus database (Elsevier) was queried with the terms (optometr* OR "contact lens*" OR refracti* OR *ocular) and the affiliation country filter "Spain". The list of authors returned by the primary search was used in a secondary manual search based on co-authors and institutions. Authors were included in the analysis if they had an h-index > 10, were of Spanish nationality, were affiliated to Spanish institutions, and possessed an optometry degree. Authors were ranked by h-index, number of publications and number of citations. Topics of research interest and target journals were determined by analyzing the 10 most highly cited papers of each author. RESULTS: A total of 32 authors with an h-index > 10 were identified, of whom 14 (43.7%) were female. Only one author had an h-index > 40, and 7 (21.9%) authors had an h-index over 20. The Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery was the first journal of choice (19.1% of highest cited papers), followed by Optometry and Vision Science (10.3%). The Universidad Complutense de Madrid hosted the largest percentage of authors (18.7%), followed by the Universitat de València (15.6%). Main topics of research interest were topography (6.5% of papers), cornea (6.2%) and contact lens (5.0%). CONCLUSION: Optometry in Spain is a fertile field of research, with an increasing number of highly cited authors publishing in high impact journals.

The evolution of the British Journal of Anaesthesia: the first 100 years.

At this centenary of the British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) in 2023, six of its 12 editors/editors-in-chief detail developments over the decades that have led to the BJA becoming a high-impact international scientific journal. As a charity, the BJA supports academic research and training in anaesthesia, critical care, and pain medicine including funding of research grants and postgraduate education. Building on this foundation, the BJA continues to innovate as it aims to become fully electronic, expand into open access publishing, and increase the diversity of its editorial board.

Global optometrist research ranking derived from a science-wide author database of standardised citation indicators.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Publications in refereed scientific journals provide a rigorous research base that underpins clinical optometric practice. Leading optometrists who generate this literature can be identified and ranked using standardised citation indicators. BACKGROUND: This work seeks to identify and rank all optometrists included in a Science-Wide author database of standardised citation indicators (S-W) and to compare this ranking with the Global Optometrist Top 200 Research Ranking (T200). METHODS: A search was conducted for the names of all optometrists in the T200 who were included in the S-W, which is a world-wide listing of the top 2% of scientists in each of 174 subfield disciplines, ranked according to a composite citation indicator (cns) that excludes self-citations and corrects for multiple authorships and author order. RESULTS: The names of 66 optometrists are found in the S-W. Of these, 58 are designated as working in the primary sub-field 'Ophthalmology & Optometry'; this listing, in rank-order of cns, is referred to as the 'S-W-derived Optometrist Research Ranking' (S-WORR). Australian optometrist Nathan Efron is ranked #1 in the S-WORR. The number (%) of optometrists in the S-WORR from each country is: the United States - 26 (45%), Australia - 12 (21%), the United Kingdom - 11 (19%), Canada - 5 (9%), Spain - 2 (3%), Hong Kong - 1 (2%) and South Africa - 1 (2%). The universities housing the equal highest number of optometrists in the S-WORR (five each) are the University of California, Berkeley, USA; the University of New South Wales, Australia; and Queensland University of Technology, Australia. There is a moderately strong correlation between T200 and S-WORR rankings (ρ = 0.6017, N = 58, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The S-WORR represents an elite cohort of optometrists who ought to be celebrated for their outstanding, leading and impactful contributions to optometric research.

Bibliometric analysis of the keratoconus literature.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians, researchers funding agencies and indeed the general public can benefit from knowledge of the most highly cited papers and most impactful authors, institutions, countries and journals in the field of keratoconus. BACKGROUND: Bibliometrics relating to the keratoconus literature were derived to enable identification of the most impactful papers published, as well as the leading authors, institutions, countries and journals. METHODS: A search was undertaken of the titles of papers on the Scopus database to identify keratoconus-related articles. The 20 most highly cited papers were determined from the total list of 4,419 papers found. Rank-order lists by count were assembled for the 'top 20' in each of four categories: authors, institutions, countries and journals. A subject-specific keratoconus-related h-index (hKC-index) was derived for each constituent of each category to serve as a measure of impact in the field. The top 10 constituents of each category were ranked by hKC-index and tabulated for consideration. RESULTS: The hKC-index of the keratoconus field is 125. The 4,419 papers have been cited a total of 98,010 times, and 18.5% of these papers have never been cited. The most highly cited paper is a general review of keratoconus by Yaron Rabinowitz, who is also the most impactful author in the field (hKC = 31). The Cedars Sinai Medical Center in the United States produces the most impactful keratoconus-related papers (hKC = 36), and the United States is the most impactful country (hKC = 91). The Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery is the most impactful journal (hKC = 55). CONCLUSION: Keratoconus is a topic of high interest in the clinical and scientific literature. Highly cited papers and impactful authors, institutions, countries and journals are identified.

h-Index Five Years On: Academic Impact Rankings of Neurosurgical Units in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to re-evaluate the h-index of neurosurgical units in the United Kingdom and Ireland because it was 5 years since it was last reported. METHODS: Using the Web of Science database, we collated cumulative (1950-2020), 10-year (2011-2020), 5-year (2016-2020), and 3-year (2018-2020) data for neurosurgical units in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Data included h-index, number of publications, and average number of citations. RESULTS: In total, 37 neurosurgical units were found in the United Kingdom and Ireland, which we ranked according to h-index. Since last reviewed 5 years previously, some units had changed their position, whereas others had remained reasonably static. The top 5 units were the same for the 10-year h-index between 2015 and 2020. The 5-year h-index showed some variation in the top 5 compared with the 10-year h-index. We were also able to compare 2 other studies with similar methods but differing from ours. CONCLUSIONS: The h-index for neurosurgical units is the most reliable bibliometric, which shows the academic standing and correlates well with amount of research grant obtained and size of department. It is particularly useful when calculated for the most recent 10-year and 5-year periods. Neurosurgical units change their rankings over time and, therefore, it is important to update the tables periodically. We propose an online database with open access showing all h-index and bibliometric data for neurosurgical units in the United Kingdom and Ireland. This database could provide a live and dynamic report of the academic standings of those units and could be used for grant applications and reviews.

21st century citation analysis of the field of contact lenses.

Clinical relevance: The scientific foundations for clinical contact lens practice are rooted in the ophthalmic literature. This analysis of contact lens papers celebrates contemporary research achievements in the contact lens field.Background: This work aims to assemble contact lens-related publication metrics so as to identify the most impactful papers published so far this century, as well the top countries, authors, institutions and journals.Methods: A search was undertaken of the titles of papers on the Scopus database to identify contact lens-related articles published this century. The ten most highly cited papers were determined from the total list of 4,164 papers found. Rank-order lists by count were assembled for the 'top 25' in each of four categories: authors, institutions, countries and journals. A 20-year subject-specific contact lens h-index (hCL-20-index) was derived for each author, institution, country and journal to serve as a measure of impact in the field. The top 10 constituents (of the top 25) of each category were ranked by hCL-20-index and tabulated for consideration.Results: The most highly cited paper this century is entitled 'Soft contact lens polymers: An evolution', by Nicholson and Vogt. Lyndon Jones is the most impactful author, with a hCL-20-index of 32. The University of New South Wales (Australia) produces the most impactful contact lens-related papers, and the United States is the most highly-ranked country. Optometry and Vision Science is the most impactful journal in the contact lens field.Conclusions: Contact lens materials and lens-associated keratitis are topics of high interest in the contemporary contact lens literature, with an emerging interest in orthokeratology for myopia control and glucose monitoring. Impactful 21st century authors, institutions, countries and journals are identified. Optometry is revealed as the leading profession in relation to the publication of impactful contact lens-related papers.

Global optometrist top 200 research ranking.

Clinical relevance: Clinical optometric practice is underpinned by a rigorous research base, the primary evidence for which is publications in refereed scientific journals. Leading optometrists who publish this work should be identified and celebrated.Background: This work aims to derive publication metrics of the leading optometric researchers worldwide.Methods: An extensive global search was conducted to discover leading optometric researchers; 480 names were identified. A custom-designed bibliographic search tool was developed to interrogate the Scopus database (Elsevier) and extract publication metrics using the unique Scopus Author Identifier number for each optometrist. On 13 January 2021, the full list was reduced to 200 optometrists (the 'Top 200') ranked by h-index - the 'Global Optometrist Top 200 Research Ranking'. The output from the custom tool automatically updates every 24 hours and is available at www.optomrankings.com.Results: The Top 200 have h-indices ranging from 20 to 67 and have published between 28 and 440 papers. Sixty one (30.5%) are women. Konrad Pesudovs has the highest h-index (67) and citations (51,193). The most prolific author is Robert Hess (442 papers). David Piñero is publishing at the fastest rate (17.6 papers per year). The Top 200 work in 13 nations, of whom 172 (86.0%) work in four nations: USA - 76 (38.0%), Australia - 43 (21.5%), UK - 41 (20.5%) and Canada - 16 (8.0%). Of the 72 institutions represented, the University of California, Berkeley, USA is home to the most Top 200 optometrists (17) and has the highest combined h-index of Top 200 optometrists (132).Conclusions: The optometric profession is supported by a robust research base, prosecuted by a large international cohort of optometric researchers who publish extensively on a broad range of ophthalmic issues and whose work is highly cited. The 200 most impactful optometrists in the world are identified.

Comparative metrics of neurosurgical scientific journals: What do they mean to readers?

BACKGROUND: In regard to scientific information, are we effectively reaching the universe of physicians in the 21st century, all of whom have different backgrounds, practice environments, educational experiences, and varying degrees of research knowledge? METHODS: A comparison of the top nine neurosurgery journals based on various popular citation indices and also on the digital metric, Readers (Users)/month, was compiled from available metrics and from internet sources. RESULTS: Major differences in the ranking of the Readers (Users)/month metrics compared to ranking of the various citation indices were found. It is obvious that the citation indices do not measure the number of readers of a publication. Which metric should be used in judging the value of a scientific paper? The answer to that question relates to what the interest of the reader has in the scientific information. It appears that the academic scientist may have a different reason for reading a scientific publication than a physician caring for a patient. CONCLUSIONS: There needs to be more than one type of metric that measures the value and "Impact" of a scientific paper based on how physicians learn.

Tracing open data in emergencies: The case of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic constitutes an ongoing, burning Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). In 2015, the World Health Organization adopted an open data policy recommendation in such situations. OBJECTIVES: The present cross-sectional meta-research study aimed to assess the availability of open data and metrics of articles pertaining to the COVID-19 outbreak in five high-impact journals. METHODS: All articles regarding the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), published in five high-impact journals (Ann Intern Med, BMJ, JAMA, NEJM and Lancet) until March 14, 2020 were retrieved. Metadata (namely the type of article, number of authors, number of patients, citations, errata, news and social media mentions) were extracted for each article in each journal in a systematic way. Google Scholar and Scopus were used for citations and author metrics respectively, and Altmetrics and PlumX were used for news and social media mentions retrieval. The degree of adherence to the PHEIC open data call was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 140 articles were published until March 14, 2020, mostly opinion papers. Sixteen errata followed these publications. The number of authors in each article ranged from 1 to 63, whereas the number of patients with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reached 2645. Extensive hyperauthorship was evident among case studies. The impact of these publications reached a total of 4210 cumulative crude citations and 342 790 news and social media mentions. Only one publication (0.7%) provided complete open data, while 32 (22.9%) included patient data. CONCLUSIONS: Even though a large number of manuscripts was produced since the pandemic, availability of open data remains restricted.

High Impact and Highly Cited Peer-Reviewed Journal Article Publications by Canadian Occupational Therapy Authors: A Bibliometric Analysis.

A bibliometric analysis of high impact and highly cited peer-reviewed literature published between 1992 and 2016 by Canadian occupational therapy authors that were included in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) or Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) was completed. To complete the analysis, journal article titles, abstracts, author details, and keywords were searched. A second-filter identified articles where the first or corresponding author had a Canadian affiliation and occupational therapy qualification. The total number of times an article was cited since its initial publication and during 2016 in Web of Science Core Collection was recorded. A total of 919 retrieved articles met the inclusion criteria with 18 articles having 5 or more citations during 2016 alone and another 34 articles having 50 or more citations since their initial publication date. The top three journals where high impact and highly-cited articles were published were Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Disability and Rehabilitation, and American Journal of Occupational Therapy. The three institutions that generated the largest number of high impact and highly cited articles were McGill University, University of Toronto, and University of British Columbia. Therefore, as of 2016, Canadian occupational therapy authors published 18 high impact and 34 highly cited articles.

A comparison of bibliometric indicators in occupational therapy journals published in English.

BACKGROUND.: The use of bibliometrics to evaluate the quality and impact of refereed journals has increased along with access to electronic databases and citation counts. PURPOSE.: This analysis compared and contrasted the range of publication metrics available for English-language occupational therapy journals. METHOD.: Bibliometric data were sourced for 23 English-language occupational therapy journals, including data from the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2- and 5-year impact factor, JCR Immediacy Index, Eigenfactor Score, Article Influence Score, Scopus Source Normalized Impact per Paper, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) score, and ResearchGate journal impact score. H-indexes for journals were also sourced. FINDINGS.: The American Journal of Occupational Therapy had the highest publication metrics. SJR-based scores included a larger number of journals, whereas JCR-based metrics were more restrictive in the number of journals included. IMPLICATIONS.: Multiple metrics should be used to comprehensively understand occupational therapy journal performance.