Twenty years of research on borderline personality disorder: a scientometric analysis of hotspots, bursts, and research trends.

Borderline personality disorder (BPD), a complex and severe psychiatric disorder, has become a topic of considerable interest to current researchers due to its high incidence and severity of consequences. There is a lack of a bibliometric analysis to visualize the history and developmental trends of researches in BPD. We retrieved 7919 relevant publications on the Web of Science platform and analyzed them using software CiteSpace (6.2.R4). The results showed that there has been an overall upward trend in research interest in BPD over the past two decades. Current research trends in BPD include neuroimaging, biological mechanisms, and cognitive, behavioral, and pathological studies. Recent trends have been identified as "prevention and early intervention", "non-pharmacological treatment" and "pathogenesis". The results are like a reference program that will help determine future research directions and priorities.

A review of top cardiology and cardiovascular medicine journal guidelines regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in scientific writing.

BACKGROUND: Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools have experienced rapid development over the last decade and are gaining increasing popularity as assistive models in academic writing. However, the ability of AI to generate reliable and accurate research articles is a topic of debate. Major scientific journals have issued policies regarding the contribution of AI tools in scientific writing. METHODS: We conducted a review of the author and peer reviewer guidelines of the top 25 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine journals as per the 2023 SCImago rankings. Data were obtained though reviewing journal websites and directly emailing the editorial office. Descriptive data regarding journal characteristics were coded on SPSS. Subgroup analyses of the journal guidelines were conducted based on the publishing company policies. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that all scientific journals in our study permitted the documented use of AI in scientific writing with certain limitations as per ICMJE recommendations. We found that AI tools cannot be included in the authorship or be used for image generation, and that all authors are required to assume full responsibility of their submitted and published work. The use of generative AI tools in the peer review process is strictly prohibited. CONCLUSION: Guidelines regarding the use of generative AI in scientific writing are standardized, detailed, and unanimously followed by all journals in our study according to the recommendations set forth by international forums. It is imperative to ensure that these policies are carefully followed and updated to maintain scientific integrity.

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.

Knowledge Mapping of Global Status and Trends for Thromboangiitis Obliterans: A Bibliometrics and Visual Analysis.

Objective: Thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO) is a segmental nonatherosclerotic inflammatory vascular disease characterized by recurrent progressive inflammatory reactions and thrombosis in the small and medium-sized arteries and veins of the extremities. However, there are few bibliometric studies on TAO. Therefore, this study was employed to generalize the research status, hotspots and development trends of TAO-related research. Methods: The data from 1999 to 2022 were collected from the Web of Science core collection database, and analyzed through bibliometrics software. VOSviewer was utilized to carry out academic collaboration between different countries/regions, institutions, and authors, visualization map of co-cited authors, journals, reference, and co-occurring keywords. CiteSpace was used to analyze the dual-map of journals, keyword bursts, and timeline of keywords. Bar and pie charts in this study were statistically analyzed and graphed through Microsoft Excel 2021. Scimago Graphica was applied to map the academic collaboration between different countries/regions. Results: A total of 553 literatures were involved in this study. Japan at the leading global position not only in the number of publications, but also total citations, average citations and H-index. Institution with the major contribution to TAO research is Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, and Nagoya University. Annals of Vascular Surgery, Angiology, Journal of Vascular Surgery are the main publication channel for articles related to TAO. Fazeli, B., Iwai, T., and Kihara, Y. are major contributors in this field. The studies on TAO keywords could be grouped into four clusters: Etiology, Mechanism, Cell therapy and Clinical therapy. Conclusion: Although the number of TAO publications has fluctuated over the past 20 years, it has generally shown a steady upward trend. Etiology and treatment research on TAO and some keywords such as trail, therapy, outcome, management, stem cells, angioplasty, and activation will become a hot spot in the future.

Bibliometric review on microplastic contamination in the Pacific Alliance countries.

Microplastics, capable of absorbing persistent organic compounds, heavy metals, and emerging pollutants, are of global concern due to their potential to alter the behavior and metabolism of biota. In Latin America, the Pacific Alliance, comprising Mexico, Colombia, Peru, and Chile, stands out for its biological wealth and productive ecosystems, which account for 37% of the region's gross domestic product. The leaders of these countries expressed their concern about microplastic pollution and pledged to take joint action. We conducted an analysis of the scientific production of these countries and the collaborations of their researchers, focused on the period 2015-2023, using Scopus and SCImago. We observed that marine-coastal/wetland ecosystems are the most studied, with a focus on fish, and that Mexico leads in publications, followed by Colombia, Peru, and Chile. In addition, we note the absence of an inter-institutional group dedicated to microplastics research in these countries. We recommend promoting collaboration between academic institutions specialized in microplastic research and government agencies dedicated to the promotion of science and technology in the countries belonging to the Pacific Alliance.

Frontiers of monkeypox research: An analysis from the top 100 most influential articles in the field.

Background: Monkeypox (MPX) has made recurrence after decades as a neglected zoonotic disease. More nations have reported endemic monkeypox in the past decade than in the previous forty. The World Health Organization has warned that the world may face another significant challenge after dealing with COVID-19, a pandemic, and the Monkeypox outbreak. Early appraisal of monkeypox research and development allows researchers to anticipate solutions for large outbreaks. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of this study's top 100 cited papers to identify regional research patterns. Methods: Our method was to search the SCI-Expanded database on Web of Science (WOS) for the top 100 papers that were cited in MPX on this database. We examined relevant literature from different years, journals, countries/regions, institutions, authors, and keywords.In order to create knowledge maps, we used the programs VOSviewer, Citespace, Scimago Graphica and the bibliometric online analysis platform. After compiling the relevant literature in Excel, we could estimate the field's focus and trends. Results: A total of 47 journals from 36 countries and regions published the top 100 cited papers between 1999 and 2023. The majority of articles were published in EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES, while the highest average number of citations per paper were found in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE. The UNITED STATES contributed the most publications, followed by ENGLAND and SWITZERLAND. As far as the total number of publications goes, the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention in the USA, the National Institute of Health in the USA, and the World Health Organization each contributed the most papers. The major categories are immunology, virology and infectious diseases. The top five keywords were infection, Congo, virus, smallpox, and transmission. The cluster analysis suggests MPX research will focus on safe and effective vaccines and epidemic prevention. Conclusion: By using bibliometric analysis, MPX researchers can quickly and visually identify their research focus and boundaries. Although studies suggest that antiviral medicine is the best treatment, creating an effective vaccine might lessen and avoid MPX pandemics in the long term. Our findings imply that safe and effective vaccines may be the focus and trends for future MPX research. International coordination for case monitoring and identification is essential to understand monkeypox disease's ever-changing epidemiology.

Dermatology journals from India: A critical appraisal of the journal metrics.

Background Bibliometrics refer to documents and citation-based measures that measure different aspects of performance of a journal, including impact, output and prestige. Objective The aim of this study was to collect bibliometric data of various Indian dermatology journals as well as Indian journals from other disciplines, in order to compare relative performances. Methods Journal metrics pertaining to various Indian journals, both from dermatology [Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL), Indian Journal of Dermatology (IJD), Indian Dermatology Online Journal, Indian Journal of Pediatric Dermatology and International Journal of Trichology] and other disciplines [Indian Journal of Medical Research (IJMR), Indian Journal of Pediatrics (IJP), Indian Journal of Ophthalmology and Indian Journal of Pharmacology] were sought. Data pertaining to the following 8 metrics during the year 2021 was collected: Journal Impact factor, SCImago Journal Rank, h5-index, Eigenfactor score and normalized Eigenfactor Score, Journal Citation Indicator, Scimago Journal and Country Rank H-index, CiteScore and Source Normalized Impact per Paper. Results Among Indian dermatology journals, for the year 2021, IJDVL had the highest impact factor (2.217) and h-index (48). IJD led in terms of prestige metrics such as SCImago Journal Rank (0.403), Eigenfactor score (0.00231) and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (1.132). IJDVL underperformed with respect to an average dermatology journal on all three prestige metrics. Among selected journals from other disciplines, two (IJMR and IJP) had impact factor exceeding five, despite lagging behind IJDVL two years ago. Most had normalized scores exceeding 1, indicating better performance than an average journal from their respective fields. Limitations Non-inclusion of altmetrics related data Conclusion IJDVL is one of the leading Indian journals in the field of dermatology, followed closely by IJD. A rise in IJDVL influence is evident over the past decade, as evident by various metrics. However, the progress still trails behind the average of global dermatology journals as evident by the field-normalized journal metrics, indicating potential for further growth of journal influence.

Frontiers of ankylosing spondylitis research: an analysis from the top 100 most influential articles in the field.

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease that frequently results in disability. It has a negative impact on patients' quality of life and puts an enormous budgetary and societal burden on society. The most effective treatment for AS has grown to be a significant issue worldwide. In order to pinpoint research focus and trends in this region, we performed a bibliometric analysis of the top 100 cited papers in this study. We searched the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded) on the Web of Science (WOS) and selected the top 100 cited papers based on AS. The pertinent literature from various years, journals, nations/regions, institutions, authors, keywords, and references were then examined. To construct knowledge maps, we used the VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Scimago Graphica programs. Excel was then used to compile the information from the pertinent literature that we had retrieved, and we were able to make predictions about the focus and trends that were currently occurring in the field. Between 1999 and 2019, the top 100 cited papers appeared in 23 journals from 36 different nations and regions. Annals of the rheumatic diseases published the majority of the articles, while Lancet had the highest average number of citations per paper. Germany contributed the most publications, followed by the Netherlands and the USA. In terms of the total number of publications, Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet contributed the most papers, followed by University Hospital Maastricht and Leiden University. The three major categories are Rheumatology, Medicine, General & Internal, and Genetics & Heredity, whereas the top 5 co-occurrence of keywords included rheumatoid arthritis, double-blind, disease activity, efficacy, and infliximab. The cluster analysis results indicate that inflammation and immunology, safe and effective therapies, and placebo-controlled trials may be focus and trends for future AS research. Bibliometric analysis can swiftly and visually identify the focus and boundaries of AS research. Our findings imply that inflammation and immunology, safe and effective therapies, and placebo-controlled trials may be focus and trends for future AS research.

AOJNMB enters the Second Decade of Publication.

No Abstract is available.

A Brief Review on Article-, Author-, and Journal-Level Scientometric Indices.

Scientometric indices help rank the impact of an article, an author, and a journal in scientific literature. Additionally, it helps to rank institutions, universities, and countries in the scientific field. There are various author-, article-, and journal-level metrics provided by different service providers. It is important to know the underlying calculation method for an informed comparison between authors, articles, and journals. In this article, we described briefly some of the common author-level metrics (h-index, i10-index, and g-index), article-level metrics (Altmetric, Dimensions, and PlumX), and journal-level metrics (Impact Factor®, CiteScore, SCImago journal ranking, and h5-index).

Scientometric assessment of scientific documents published in 2020 on herbal medicines used for COVID-19.

Objective: Many studies have suggested herbal medicines as alternatives or adjuvants to modern drugs for COVID-19. Their scientometric analyses can provide a scientific overview of this topic. Materials and methods: Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus were searched for articles on the use of herbal medicines in COVID-19 published until 26 October 2020. Collected data were analyzed for document type, subject area, top journal, citation number, and authors' collaboration network using VOSviewer 1.6.15, ScientoPy 2.0.3, Gephi 0.9.2, and SPSS 15 statistical tools. Results: After screening the 3185 retrieved records, 378 and 849 records, respectively from WOS and Scopus, remained for quantity analysis. Original and review articles were the two main types of papers in both databases. Top subject areas were drug and medicine, respectively in the WOS and Scopus databases. The top three productive countries in the field were China, the US, and India. The most cited article was a practice guideline in both databases. "Journal of Biomolecular Structure Dynamics" in WOS and "Chinese Traditional and Herbal Drugs" in Scopus were the top journals. Top keywords included "COVID-19″ and "Traditional Chinese Medicine". US authors had the highest collaboration with other authors. Conclusions: The current study provides a snapshot of the quantity and characteristics of published scholarly documents in recent months in the intersection of herbal medicines and COVID-19. Our findings help scientists to find the existing gaps, identify the active authors and scientific institutes to collaborate with and use their experience to produce new knowledge in the future.

Ten-Year Trends in Level of Evidence in Hand Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purposes of this study were to analyze the trends in Oxford level of evidence (LOE), LOE of most-cited articles, and association between LOE and journal impact factor (IF) and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) over a 10-year period (2009-2018) in 3 prominent hand surgery journals, specifically HAND, Journal of Hand Surgery (American Volume) (JHS), and Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) (JHSE). METHODS: All articles published from 2009 to 2018 in HAND, JHS, and JHSE were reviewed for assigned or available LOE. Data were pooled and analyzed for trends in LOE; relationship among IF, SJR, and LOE; and citation density. RESULTS: A total of 3921 total publications were tabulated from 2009 to 2018, with the majority of studies being level V (1700, 43%) and fewer studies being level I (146, 4%). Over the 10-year study period, there was no significant change in frequency of level I studies for any journal. HAND trended significantly toward higher LOE, JHS trended toward higher LOE, and JHSE trended toward decreased LOE without significance. Among all journals, the annual number of articles and the average LOE were independent significant predictors of IF and SJR. Statistically significant correlations were found between citation density and LOE for JHS and HAND. CONCLUSIONS: Higher quality evidence is becoming more prevalent in the hand surgery literature over the past 10 years. Annual articles, average LOE, and level I and II and level IV articles were significant predictors of increasing IF and SJR.

Indicadores bibliométricos: impacto y altmetrics para una evaluación amplia y equitativa de las revistas científicas de Colombia / Bibliometrics Indicators: Impact and Altmetrics for an Extensive and Equitable Assessment of Colombian Scientific Journals / Indicadores bibliométricos: impacto e altmetria para uma avaliação ampla e equitativa das revistas científicas colombianas

La medición y análisis de la calidad de las publicaciones científicas es de fundamental importancia para evaluar el progreso e impacto de investigadores, grupos de investigación y revistas científicas en la comunidad académica y la sociedad (1,2). Tradicionalmente, la evaluación se encomendaba a pares de reconocida trayectoria, idoneidad y prestigio. Sin embargo, para eliminar subjetividades, desde hace varios años se ha recurrido a indicadores bibliométricos que propenden por una calificación mensurable, objetiva y multidimensional (1,3). Los indicadores bibliométricos (IB) pueden definirse como cuantificadores de información bibliográfica, disponible en documentos científicos y académicos, susceptible de ser analizada en términos de producción y consumo (1,2). Existe una variada tipología de IB (1,2) en función del objeto a examinar (investigador, revista o grupo de investigación) y que en algunos casos son transversales a este. Así, los indicadores personales (edad, sexo y antecedentes de los autores) solo aplican a investigadores o grupos, mientras que los de productividad e impacto aplican también a revistas. Para estas, el indicador de productividad (cantidad) y, aún más, el de impacto ("calidad") son rutinariamente empleados para clasificarlas y compararlas con el propósito, cada vez más controversial, de medir su pertinencia y relevancia académica y/o social (4).

Measuring and analyzing the quality of scientific publications is fundamentally important for assessing the progress and impact of researchers, research groups and scientific journals in the academic community and society (1,2). Traditionally, this assessment was entrusted to peers with a recognized track record, eligibility and prestige. However, bibliometric indicators have been used for several years to eliminate subjectivity, which aim at a measurable, objective and multi-dimensional qualification (1,3). Bibliometric indicators (BI) can be defined as quantifiers of the bibliographic information available in scientific and academic documents susceptible to being analyzed in terms of production and consumption (1,2). There is a typological variety of BI (1,2) based on the object to be examined (researcher, journal or research group) and, in some cases, they are cross-sectional to it. In this way, personal indicators (age, gender and background of the authors) only apply to researchers or groups, while productivity and impact also apply to journals. For journals, the productivity (quantity) and, more so, impact ("quality") indicators, are routinely used to classify journals and compare them, with the increasingly controversial purpose of measuring their academic and/or social pertinence and relevance (4).

A medição e análise da qualidade das publicações científicas é de fundamental importância para avaliar o progresso e o impacto de pesquisadores, grupos de pesquisa e revistas científicas na comunidade acadêmica e na sociedade (1,2). Tradicionalmente, a avaliação era confiada a pares de reconhecida trajetória, idoneidade e prestígio. No entanto, a fim de eliminar subjetividades, há vários anos são utilizados indicadores bibliométricos que visam uma qualificação mensurável, objetiva e multidimensional (1,3). Indicadores bibliométricos (IB) podem ser definidos como quantificadores de informações bibliográficas, disponíveis em documentos científicos e acadêmicos, passíveis de análise em termos de produção e consumo (1,2). Existe uma tipologia de IB variada (1,2) dependendo do objeto a ser examinado (pesquisador, periódico ou grupo de pesquisa) e que em alguns casos são transversais a ele. Assim, os indicadores pessoais (idade, sexo e formação dos autores) se aplicam apenas a pesquisadores ou grupos, enquanto os de produtividade e impacto também se aplicam a periódicos. Para estes, o indicador de produtividade (quantidade) e, mais ainda, o indicador de impacto ("qualidade") são rotineiramente utilizados para classificá-los e compará-los com o propósito cada vez mais controverso de medir sua pertinência e relevância acadêmica e/ou social (4).

Comparison of subscription access and open access obstetrics and gynecology journals in the SCImago database.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare the annual SJR and to evaluate the other parameters that show the scientific effect of journals in terms of open access (OA) or subscription access (SA) in the field of obstetrics and gynecology according to the SCImago database. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was conducted between September-December 2019 at Near East University. The SCImago Journal & Country Rank database was used to collect information about the journals. We evaluated and compared the changes in the one-year SJR (SCImago Journal Rank) and journal impact factor (JIF) of OA and SA journals. RESULTS: Data from 183 scientific journals in the field of obstetrics and gynecology from the period between 1999 and 2018 were evaluated, where 140 of these journals were SA and 43 were OA. The average SJR of OA journals in 1999 was 0.17, while it was 0.38 for SA journals. In 2018, these values were 0.31 and 0.78 for OA and SA journals, respectively. In the comparison of JIF, the average of the OA journals in 1999 was 0.09, while it was 0.66 for SA journals. In 2018, these values were 0.80 and 1.93 for OA and SA journals, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Access to information has become easier due to technological developments and this will continue to affect the access policies of journals. Despite the disadvantages of predator journals, the rise of OA journals in terms of number and quality is likely to continue.

Avoiding predatory publishing for early-career ophthalmologists.

This article aims at analyzing the impact of predatory publishing in ophthalmology, criteria to identify a legitimate journal, red flags of a predatory journal, sources, and checkpoints available before publishing scientific work in a standard ophthalmology journal. A retrospective review was performed and a list of suspected Ophthalmology predatory journals was extracted through four major so-called blacklists: Beall's, Cabell's, Manca's, and Strinzel's list. This list of journals was then cross-referenced with the UGC CARE and vetted whitelist of vision science journals to remove the legitimate journals. Moreover, as all the predatory journals are supposed to be open access, all possible types of open-access journals on the Scimago webpage were also searched. A gross estimate in terms of publication cost was searched for, and a list of authentic links to find out a legitimate journal was prepared. Additionally, the methodology by which these predatory journals penetrate legitimate indexes such as PubMed was also evaluated. A total of 51 ophthalmology predatory journals were enlisted. Thirty-eight out of 124 Ophthalmology journals listed on Scimago were open access, and the cost of publishing in predatory journals ranged from USD50-500, which is substantially lower than that in legitimate journals (USD 50-3000). A total of 13 open-access platforms exist, with 10 characteristic red flags to identify a predatory journal. These journals have penetrated legitimate indexes such as PubMed by similar-sounding names to the legitimate journals and have published articles with external funding, which needs indexing. Predatory publishing impacts the quality of research in every field, including Ophthalmology, and must be discouraged.

Impact of country self citation on the ranking of the top 50 countries in clinical neurology.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the factors that influence country self-citation rate (SCR) in clinical neurology and to assess the impact of self-citation on the ranking of the top 50 countries. METHODS: SCImago Journal & Country Rank was used to collect data for the 50 most cited countries in clinical neurology during 1996-2019. Country SCR was correlated with several productivity parameters and examined statistically. Countries that dropped in their ranking after the exclusion of self-citations were identified. RESULTS: The median (range) country SCR for the 50 most cited countries was 11.3%.(5.3%- 47%). Country SCR correlated significantly with total citable documents and total cites numbers and rankings. The exclusion of self-citations led to a drop in the ranking of 8(16%) countries only. No significant difference between the total and net total cites rankings was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Self-citation can be appropriate and reflect an expansion on earlier research. Highly cited productive countries tend to have high country SCR. Excluding self-citations had minimal impact on the ranking of the top 50 countries. Our findings indicate that self-citation is unlikely to influence country standing amongst the top 50 and does not support the argument for eliminating self-citations from citation-based metrics. A more globalization through international collaboration in research is encouraged.

The Impact of Country Self-Citation Rate Among Medical Specialties in Saudi Arabia.

Objectives The purpose of the study was to evaluate the impact of country self-citation rate (SCR) among medical specialties in Saudi Arabia, and to assess the impact of self-citations on the country's total cites world ranking in different specialties. Methods SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) was used to collect data related to all medical specialties in Saudi Arabia for the period 1996-2019. The country SCR for the specialties was correlated with several bibliometric parameters and examined statistically. The specialties that showed a drop in Saudi Arabia's total cites world ranking following the exclusion of self-citations were identified. Results The median country SCR for 46 specialties in Saudi Arabia was 9.5% (range: 4.6-23.1%). The two specialties with the highest country SCR were Public Health (23.1%) and Family Practice (22.9%). Country SCR was significantly higher in the non-clinical specialties compared to clinical specialties (15.3% vs. 9.6%). It did not correlate significantly with any of the examined productivity indices. The exclusion of self-citations resulted in a drop in Saudi Arabia's total cites world ranking in six (13%) specialties only. There was no significant difference between the country's total cites and net total cites world rankings in the specialties. Conclusions Self-citation may be appropriate and signify an expansion of the authors' previous work. Country SCR in medical specialties in Saudi Arabia is relatively low and not affected by total documents and total cites. Non-clinical specialties tend to self-cite more. The exclusion of self-citations had minimal effect on Saudi Arabia's total cites world ranking, indicating that country SCR in the specialties is unlikely to impact its international scientific standing. Our findings do not support the argument for eliminating self-citation from citation-based metrics. We believe that more collaborative and global research practices should be encouraged.