Search

Objective: This study aimed to analyze the original articles published in Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica (AOTT) between 2013 and 2022 using bibliometric methods to identify their characteristics and examine the changing trends over the last 10 years., Methods: The articles were analyzed in terms of publication year, authors, countries, affiliations, citations, study design, subspecialty of orthopedics, sample size, study outcome, presence of statistical methods, time elapsed from submission date to acceptance date, and presence of funding. Periods (2003-2012 and 2013-2022) were compared for trend analysis in the journal. Advanced bibliometric analysis was done using VOSviewer software (version 1.6.19)., Results: A total of 976 articles were included in the analysis. The journal's self-citation rate was 2.94%. Retrospective observational studies remained the most frequently published article design, as observed over 2003-2012 (n=411, 42.1%). No review articles were published in the previous period, while 35 review articles were published in this period. Publications from countries outside Türkiye exhibited a significantly higher number of case reports and reviews (P = .001), whereas articles from Türkiye had a significantly greater number of basic science and cross-sectional studies (P = .007, P=.017, respectively). Trauma (n=207), general orthopedics (n=144), and spine (n=105) were identified as the most prominent subspecialties. Spine surgery and adult reconstruction/arthroplasty publications significantly increased, while hand and microsurgery publications significantly decreased (P < .001). Article types were compared regarding citation counts, revealing that case reports and technical notes had significantly lower citation counts (P = .001). There was a significant increase observed in the number of author affiliations (n=2.57 ± 1.40) (P < .001). Management" (n=83), "fixation" (n=78), and "surgery" (n=65) were the most occurring keywords. There was a significant increase in articles with 1 or 2 authors in the latter 2017-2022 period compared to 2013-2016 (P=.001). A significant increase was observed in publications from private clinics and other clinical facilities (P < .001)., Conclusion: Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica (AOTT) has emerged as one of the leading journals in orthopedics, with a notable increase in international publications in the last decade. Being in the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded) database, increasing impact factor, and having low self-citation rates highlight its high standards and global impact. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica (AOTT) is a valuable platform for researchers worldwide to share their work and advance orthopedic knowledge., Level of Evidence: N/A.

Gender equity and authorship diversity are believed to be the essential parts of building a dynamic scientific atmosphere. The purpose of the present study was to determine the status of gender equity in research on echinococcosis and the editorial diversity in major parasitology journals over the past four decades. All articles were retrieved from major databases from the years 1980, 2000, 2010, 2015, and 2020. Journals belonging to the four quartiles of parasitology journals listed in the Journal Citation Report were selected, and the gender and region of each editorial member were identified. Among the 3583 first authors of the articles published in all selected years, 2236 (62.4%) were men, whereas 1040 (29%) were women. There was a significant increase in women's contributions as the first author, from 6.8% in 1980 to 35.8% in 2020 ( P < .001). A greater gender gap was found for the senior authors, showing 2391 (66.7%) men and 837 (23.4%) women. The gender gap has been narrowed in most of the six regions of the world, particularly for the Western Pacific region, where the gender inequity had almost diminished in 2020; i.e. the man-woman ratios of the first and last authors from this region were 2.25 and 1.75 in 1980, reaching 1.04 and 0.97, in 2020, respectively. Our findings also indicated that articles authored by men received 2.5 to 3.1 times more citations than women authors. Gender distribution of the editors-in-chief, associate editors, and editorial board members across all quartiles showed that 78.7%, 69.5%, and 72.7% were men, respectively, and mostly affiliated with the European and American regions. Findings of the present study showed that gender inequity is still present and women researchers continue to be the minority in the field of parasitology, particularly in the research on echinococcosis.

Statement of Problem: Data on the level of evidence and the characteristics of studies published in peer-reviewed prosthodontic journals are lacking., Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the characteristics and level of evidence (LOE) scores of studies published in 3 leading peer-reviewed prosthodontic journals., Material and Methods: Clinical studies published in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry (JPD), the Journal of Prosthodontics (JP), and the International Journal of Prosthodontics (IJP) in 2013 and 2020 were included in the analysis. Abstracts, letters to the editor, book reviews, and animal and laboratory studies were excluded from the investigation. For each study, design, type and LOE scores (Levels 1 to 5), publication year, impact factor (IF) of the journals, geographic origins of the first and corresponding authors, and funding status were recorded. Level 1 and Level 2 were defined as high evidence (HE), and Level 3, Level 4, and Level 5 were defined as low evidence (LE). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed (α=.05)., Results: Among the 439 studies included in the analysis, the proportion of HE and LE studies was 14.1% and 85.9%, respectively. According to univariate and multivariate analysis results, year of publication (P=.010 and P=.029), geographic origin of the corresponding author (P<.001), and funding status (P<.001 and P=.002) were significantly associated with the LOE of a study. However, the journal IF was not associated with LOE (P=.328)., Conclusions: Although the number of HE studies in 3 leading prosthodontic journals has increased over time, the total number was still limited compared with LE studies. A further improvement in the overall LOE of clinical studies in prosthodontics is needed., (Copyright © 2022 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Dental implants are an established treatment option for varying edentulous conditions that has grown in popularity since the 1990s. This increased clinical application has shown a parallel increase in implant-related research. The objective of this paper was to perform a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of five dental implantology journals from 1991 to 2023., Materials and Methods: A search was done in the Web of Science database between 1991 and 2023 in five journals with a focus on dental implantology: Clinical Oral Implant Research, Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Implant Dentistry, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, and International Journal of Oral Implantology. Results marked as a correction, retraction notice, retracted article, meeting abstract, or withdrawn publication were removed from the analysis. The time period analyzed was divided into four time periods, organized by decade: 1991 to 2000, 2001 to 2010, 2011 to 2020, and 2021 to 2023. Additionally, the top 100 cited papers were also exported separately. Authors and countries with most publications were tabulated from the Web of Science database. VOSviewer software was used to create network maps of keywords and title word occurrences for each of the time periods. HistCite software was used to analyze the number of publications and citation counts., Results: Network maps of keywords and title word occurrences suggested an early focus on osseointegration and titanium implants between 1991 and 2000. Publications between 2001 and 2010 saw a focus on in vivo studies, implant surface, and peri-implantitis. Publications from 2011 and later saw a focus on bone regeneration, complications, and zygomatic implants. The USA ranked highest in total number of publications in all analyzed time periods., Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present study, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis from 1990 to 2023 was reported. Trends in keywords and titles of implant publications were identified in these journals, which mirrored the trends seen in clinical practice.

Introduction: COVID-19 changed scholarly publishing. Yet, its impact on medical education publishing is unstudied. Because journal articles and their corresponding publication timelines can influence academic success, the field needs updated publication timelines to set evidence-based expectations for academic productivity. This study attempts to answer the following research questions: did publication timelines significantly change around the time of COVID-19 and, if so, how?, Methods: We conducted a bibliometric study; our sample included articles published between January 2018, and December 2022, that appeared in the Medical Education Journals List-24 (MEJ-24). We clustered articles into three time-based groups (pre-COVID, COVID-overlap, and COVID-endemic), and two subject-based groups (about COVID-19 and not about COVID-19). We downloaded each article's metadata from the National Library of Medicine and analyzed data using descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, and post-hoc tests to compare mean time differences across groups., Results: Overall, time to publish averaged 300.8 days ( SD = 200.8). One-way between-groups ANOVA showed significant differences between the three time-based groups F (2, 7473) = 2150.7, p < .001. The post-hoc comparisons indicated that COVID-overlap articles took significantly longer ( n = 1470, M = 539; SD = 210.6) as compared to pre-COVID ( n = 1281; M = 302; SD = 172.5) and COVID-endemic articles ( n = 4725; M = 226; SD = 136.5). Notably, COVID-endemic articles were published in significantly less time than pre-pandemic articles, p < .001., Discussion: Longer publication time was most pronounced for COVID-overlap articles. Publication timelines for COVID-endemic articles have shortened. Future research should explore how the shift in publication timelines has shaped medical education scholarship., Competing Interests: Lauren A. Maggio is Deputy Editor in Chief for Perspectives on Medical Education. She was removed from all editorial processes relating to the handling of this submission. The authors have no additional competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s).)

Introduction: Case reports are perceived as having diminished value relative to other study designs. It has been said that medical toxicology (MT) is based largely upon case report literature and thought to be unique in this regard. We sought to quantify recent MT publication of case reports compared with top periodicals from emergency medicine (EM) and internal medicine (IM) journals., Methods: A retrospective review examined 5 years of articles in 6 U.S.-based medical journals-MT (Journal of Medical Toxicology, Clinical Toxicology), EM (Annals of Emergency Medicine, Journal of Emergency Medicine), and IM (JAMA Internal Medicine, New England Journal of Medicine) was performed using on-line resources. Every article in each issue was categorized into Case report vs. Research and Analysis articles vs. Excluded. "Case report" was defined as one (or ≤ 5) individual patients, one patient's data, etc. Total articles per issue were reported after removing Excluded items., Results: Between 2018 and 2022, these 6 periodicals published 522 issues; with 2644 case reports; and 8246 total included articles. Comparison of MT case reports vs. EM revealed a significant difference and odds (Odds Ratio = 1.7, (95% CI: [1.49, 2.03], p < 0.001); MT compared with IM was not significantly different (Odds Ratio = 1.1, (95% CI: [0.96, 1.30], p = 0.150). The percent of case reports increased in the IM and EM journals compared with a relative decrease in the MT journals. Cumulative case report precents were consistently greater in EM and IM than in MT., Conclusion: In the past 5 years, MT journals published fewer and had a declining trend of case reports compared with leading EM and IM journals. Future research is needed to determine the effect on MT practice resulting from the diminished body of case report literature., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: To evaluate where orthodontic research papers are published and to explore potential relationships between the journal of publication and the characteristics of the research study and authorship., Methods: An online literature search of seven research databases was undertaken to identify orthodontic articles published in English language over a 12-month period (1 January-31 December 2022) (last search: 12 June 2023). Data extracted included journal, article, and author characteristics. Journal legitimacy was assessed using a ternary classification scheme including available blacklists and whitelists, cross-checking of indexing claims and history of sending unsolicited emails. The level of evidence (LOE) of all included studies was assessed using a modified Oxford LOE classification scale. Univariable and multivariable ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to examine possible associations between the level of evidence, journal discipline, and authorship characteristics., Results: A total of 753 studies, published by 246 unique journal titles, were included and further assessed. Nearly two-thirds of orthodontic papers were published in non-orthodontic journals (62.8%) and over half (55.6%) of the articles were published in open-access policy journals. About a fifth of the articles (21.2%) were published either in presumed predatory journals or in journals of uncertain legitimacy. Journal discipline was significantly associated with the level of evidence. Higher-quality orthodontic studies were more likely published in established orthodontic journals (likelihood ratio test P < .001)., Limitations: The identification and classification of predatory journals are challenging due to their covert nature., Conclusions: The majority of orthodontic articles were published in non-orthodontic journals. In addition, approximately one in five orthodontic studies were published in presumed predatory journals or in journals of uncertain legitimacy. Studies with higher levels of evidence were more likely to be published in established orthodontic journals., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The subspecialized, clinically complex nature of neurosurgery should not result in marginalization or under-representation of neurosurgical scientific output. This study aims to provide an overview of the trends of neurosurgical publications in high-impact medical journals during the past 3 decades., Methods: An electronic database search was performed to identify all articles affiliated with neurosurgery departments published in 10 highly regarded medical journals. The trend of the proportion of neurosurgical publications to total publications in these journals was examined over time. Subgroup analyses on the basis of location, setting, domain, grant source, and topic of the articles were performed., Results: Overall, 2090 neurosurgical publications were identified in the selected journals, comprising 0.26% of those journals' publications. The proportion of neurosurgical publications to total publications in these journals increased over time, from 0.03% before 1991 to 0.35% after 2020. Most studies were single-center (82.7%), clinical (52.4%), and primary research (89%). The United States (40.1%), China (12.4%) and the United Kingdom (7.1%) had the greatest number of neurosurgical publications among those analyzed. The share of clinical neurosurgical articles increased over time compared with basic and translational articles (P = 0.01). Among neurosurgical subspecialties, neuro-oncology (60.1%), vascular (19.0%), and general (7.0%) had the greatest number of publications identified, with substantial increases in vascular publications over time. The mean number of citations per year received by neurosurgical articles has increased over time, from 1.65 (before 1991) to 4.12 (2010-2020)., Conclusions: Neurosurgery's proportion of high-impact journal publications has increased over time., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose of Review: A bibliometric analysis was performed to analyze and compare the top 100 articles from the most well-known five pain journals: Pain, Pain Physician, Pain Medicine, Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, and Journal of Pain. A query of the Scopus database was performed to filter the top 200 most cited articles from each journal. CY score was calculated for the top 200 articles from each journal by dividing the total number of citations by the number of years the article has been published., Recent Findings: All articles had a collective analysis of the top CY scores, the top 100 of which were further analyzed. The pain subtype, type of publication, country of origin, and senior author were extrapolated from these top 100 articles. Frequency tables were organized, revealing Pain Journal as the highest publishing journal out of the top 100 articles. Chronic pain was the most studied subtype of pain and narrative reviews were the most common type of evidence. Studies were also organized in five-year epochs to analyze the frequency of publications in these intervals. Results show that 2010-2014 had the highest frequency of articles published overall. Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is also an objective indicator of the average number of citations per published article from each journal. The journal with the highest JIF was Pain with an impact factor of 7.926. (6)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The purpose of the present study was to analyze Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly (APAQ) publications over the journal's fourth decade (2014-2023) and compare them with previous documentary analyses of the first 3 decades. Consistent with prior documentary analyses, publications were coded and analyzed based on the use of theory, research participants, topic, whether the study was an intervention, first-author country affiliation, and research method. The total number of published research papers increased substantially (n = 61) from the third to the fourth decade. Similar to prior documentary analyses, most of the research was quantitative (n = 140; 57.5%), followed by qualitative research (n = 96; 39.5%). There were far more qualitative-research publications in the fourth decade compared with the third decade (n = 34). This may reflect the continued acceptance and growth of qualitative research compared with 10-20 years ago. It may also reflect the value of rich in-depth exploratory research using small samples. Additional trends included more review papers and meta-analyses, possibly reflecting the increased knowledge base in particular areas requiring synthesis. The diversity of topics also increased, with papers on dignity, classification, coaching, and the Paralympics playing more prominent roles. The number of international publications also grew substantially. In brief, the current paper outlines both similarities and differences in APAQ's published research over the 4 decades of its existence.

This bibliometric study aimed to identify and analyze the 100 most cited articles about orofacial trauma in children and adolescents. The search was conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS-CC) using a combined search strategy. Two researchers collected the following data from each article: year of publication, country, journal, number and density of citations, author, institutions, study design, type of trauma, and keywords. The VOSviewer and SPSS version 22.0 softwares were used for data analyses. The articles were published from 1968 to 2012 and the number of citations ranged from 49 to 176. Europe was the continent with most articles (40 articles; 3,408 citations). Brazil was the country that made the largest contribution (20 articles; 1,741 citations) and the Universidade do Sul de Santa Catarina (Brazil) was the institution with most articles (5 articles; 492 citations). Marcenes W was the most productive author (8 articles; 968 citations). The cross-sectional study design was the most common (50 articles; 3,978 citations). The most frequent field was epidemiology (73 articles; 5,971 citations). The most widely used criteria for trauma diagnosis were the Andreasen (18 articles; 1,505 citations) and Le Fort (3 articles; 260 citations). Strong positive correlations were found in the number of citations between WoS-CC and Google Scholar (r = 0.929; p < 0.001), WoS-CC and Scopus (r = 0.976; p < 0.001), and Google Scholar and Scopus (r = 0.903; p < 0.001). The 100 most cited articles about orofacial trauma in children and adolescents were mainly cross-sectional studies published by Brazilian authors in epidemiology using Andreasen criteria. Dental Traumatology was the journal with the largest contribution.

To evidence the existence of a gender gap in the orthopedic scientific literature by including also differences between some specific orthopedic surgery specialities, such as hands and feet. Then, we also considered gender role in the Authorship linked with the economic wealth of each country belonging to each Author. The gender of the first Authors of journals on orthopedics and sports medicine indexing in the Scopus database with the highest impact factor (IF) related to the year 2019, for the period from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, were considered. A total of 11 journals were considered, including a total of 5474 articles, 1087 (19.86%) had a woman as the first Author and 4387 (80.14%) a man. During the studied period, the trend seems to be the same (p = 0.906): Men were significantly more producing than women in the orthopedic field both by considering the topic of the journal (p = .003), all the most impacted orthopedic journals (p < 0.001) and economies (p < 0.001). There was therefore a strong significance: In the orthopedic field, there were significantly more male researchers who presented their first name in scientific publications compared to females in all orthopedic subspecialties. The economically poorer countries published less and the role of women became almost absent., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli.)

Purpose:  To investigate if radiology researchers are increasingly promoting their scientific findings by more frequently using positive words in their publications., Materials and Methods:  This study included all articles that were published in 14 general radiology journals between 2003 and 2022. The title and abstract of each article were assessed for the presence of positive, negative, neutral, and random words, according to predefined sets of words for each category. Usage of positive, negative, neutral, and random words was calculated for each year and corrected for the total number of articles in each year. Temporal trends between 2002 and 2023 and the relationship between positive word usage and journal impact factor (IF) were assessed., Results:  Positive word usage (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.895, P< 0.001) and neutral word usage (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.463, P = 0.005) showed significant upward temporal trends. Negative word usage and random word usage did not show any significant temporal trends. Five positive words showed significantly increased usage over time and were present in more than 1 % of titles/abstracts in at least one year: "excellent" (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.800, P< 0.001), "favorable" (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.547, P< 0.001), "promising" (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.607, P< 0.001), "robust" (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.737, P< 0.001), and "unique" (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.747, P< 0.001). There was no significant association between positive word usage and journal IF., Conclusion:  Radiology researchers appear to increasingly promote their scientific findings by more frequently using positive words in their publications over the past two decades., Key Points:   · Positive word usage in titles/abstracts has strongly increased between 2003-2022. · "Excellent", "favorable", "promising", "robust", and "unique" were most often used. · This trend occurred in all general radiology journals, regardless of impact factor., Citation Format: · Kwee T, Kwee R. Promotional language in radiology publications: increasing use of "excellent", "favorable", "promising", "robust", and "unique". Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; 196: 945 - 955., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Our study aimed to determine the current percentage of gender and sex equity promoting (GSEP) radiology journals, defined as satisfying at least one criterion of the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) checklist, published by the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). A secondary objective was to compare characteristics of GSEP and non-GSEP journals., Methods: A cross-sectional analysis between June 24 and July 3, 2023, was conducted. The author submission guidelines of radiology journals with a 2021 Journal Impact Factor (JIF) were assessed according to the SAGER checklist. GSEP journals were defined as satisfying one or more SAGER checklist criteria in their research instructions. Bibliometric data and journal information were collected from the Journal Citation Reports and National Library of Medicine catalogue., Results: Only 39.7 % (52) of 132 journals satisfied at least one SAGER checklist criterion. Median 2021 JIFs were higher in GSEP journals (4.62, IQR: 3.73 - 5.21) than non-GSEP journals (2.70, IQR: 2.32) (p = 0.00). Median 2021 Journal Citation Index (JCI) scores were higher in GSEP (0.64, 0.56 - 0.73) than non-GSEP journals (0.97, 0.83 - 1.10) (p = 0.00). Cited half-life was shorter for GSEP (5.40, 4.80 - 6.50) than non-GSEP journals (6.70, 5.70 - 7.40) (p = 0.05). Elsevier published 33 of 52 of GSEP journals., Conclusion: 60.3% of radiology journals with a 2021 JIF do not meet a single SAGER checklist criterion in their author submission guidelines. GSEP journals had higher impact and source metrics and a shorter cited half-life. Publishers may play a significant role in promoting endorsement of the SAGER checklist in the author submission guidelines of radiology journals., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology is the oldest pharmacological journal, founded in 1873. This bibliometric analysis examines the pivotal transformations within Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology from 1947 to 1974, identifying significant shifts from a national focus to a period of extensive internationalization and English-language adoption. Employing Python and Beautiful Soup for data extraction from SpringerLink, the study maps the journal's trajectory through post-World War II development, highlighting the decline in publication rates due to its initial emphasis on German-language articles predominantly from Germany. The transition towards English publications in the late 1960s is marked as a turning point, catalyzing an increase in global citations, publications, and recognition. This period witnesses the journal broadening its scientific horizon, with a notable emphasis on the cholinergic, adrenergic, and dopaminergic systems, reflecting their central role in the journal's scientific discourse and citation prominence. The analysis demonstrates how shifting to English for academic publishing played a crucial role in revitalizing the journal's impact and visibility on the international stage., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction:  In the era of scientific digitalization, online media platforms gain increasing popularity to accomplish research output awareness. The Altmetric Attention Score AAS weights these online mentions based on a privy algorithm. We aimed to characterize the top 100 articles with the highest (AAS) published in pediatric surgery journals., Materials and Methods:  Publications from six core pediatric surgery journals were retrieved from www.altmetric.com in January 2023 and ranked by their AAS. The top 101 publications were analyzed for their bibliometric measures, study design, and quality as well as online media mentions., Results:  The top 101 AAS articles were published between 1974 and 2022, preferentially from the United States (64%) and mainly in Journal of Pediatric Surgery (73%), followed by Journal of Pediatric Surgery Case Report s, Pediatric Surgery International , Seminars in Pediatric Surgery , and European Journal of Pediatric Surgery . Their AAS ranged between 21 and 389 (median: 33), with Twitter/X being mostly responsible for online mentions ( n  = 2,189; 75%). The number of citations in peer-reviewed journals ranged between 0 and 358 (median: 16) and did not correlate to AAS. Retrospective study design (33%) with low evidence level IV (43%) dominated., Conclusion:  The Journal of Pediatric Surgery is the main source of high-profile AAS publications in pediatric surgery. The altmetric popularity of articles is predominantly achieved by their propagation via X, irrespective of the study quality and recognition in the scientific community. Thus, active "twitterism" may play the key role to reach high AAS scores., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The influence of Open Access (OA) on the citation impact of scholarly articles remains a topic of considerable debate. This study aims to elucidate the relationship between OA publication and citation metrics, as well as article visibility, within the context of the Postgraduate Medical Journal (PMJ)., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 373 articles published in PMJ between 2020 and 2021. Data on OA status, citations, page views, PDF downloads, and other relevant variables were extracted from Journal Citation Reports and PMJ's official website. Multivariable linear regression and other statistical analyses were used to assess the impact of OA on these metrics., Results: OA articles (n = 78) demonstrated significantly higher citation counts, page views, and PDF downloads compared with subscription-based articles (n = 295). Specifically, OA articles showed a significant increase in citation frequency with a β coefficient of 25.08 and a 95% CI of 17.168-32.992 (P < .001). Similarly, OA status was independently associated with increases in page views [β = 288.636, 95%CI: 177.749-399.524, P < .001] and PDF downloads [β = 118.966, 95%CI: 86.357-151.575, P < .001]. Strong correlations among total citations, page views, and PDF downloads were observed in both OA and subscription articles., Conclusion: The study highlights a significant and independent association of OA publishing with increased citation counts, page views, and PDF downloads in PMJ, suggesting that OA articles have broader reach and greater visibility. Further research, including randomized controlled studies across various journals, is needed to confirm these findings and explore the full impact of OA publishing., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: To analyse the bibliometric data of nursing journals covering general fields, specializations, skills and practices and investigate the influence of selection factors on the one-year improved SCImago journal rank (SJR)., Design: A bibliometric analysis., Methods: The study sample included academic journals in the field of nursing indexed in the Scopus and SJR database using data from 2020 to 2022. Quantile regression were performed that investigated the influence factors over the one-year improved SJR when variables were found to be non-normally distributed, characterized by extremely high kurtosis., Results: Results from 539 nursing journals retrieved from the Scopus and SCImago databases revealed that citation index remains the main factor that positively affects differences in SJR, while citable articles only affect the early stages of quantile regression. In addition, an excessively high number of research articles may negatively affect SJR, and the influence of self-citations can initially be positive but become negative the following year. Citations continue to be the dominant factor, while the rapid growth in the number of articles and self-citations must be addressed with caution., No Patient or Public Contribution: No patient or public contribution., (© 2024 The Author(s). Nursing Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality, disproportionately affecting low-income and low-middle-income countries (LICs/LMICs). Despite this, cardiology research commonly comes from affluent regions. This study assessed the authorship trends from LICs/LMICs in cardiology journals listed in PubMed from 2000 to 2022. The World Bank list was used to classify countries. The total number of articles published in the 138 cardiology journals was 529,359. The percentage of articles that included at least one author affiliated with LICs/LMICs institutions was 0.11 % and 2.23 %, respectively. Over the last decade, there has been an increase in the author's representation from LICs/LMICs; however, it is uneven, with some countries experiencing more significant increases (Zambia, Yemen, and Uganda for LICs, and India, Iran, and Lebanon for LMICs). Our findings highlight the inequity of research publication and invite our community to reflect on the need to develop strategies to improve representation from LICs/LMICs., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Citation scores (CS) have been traditionally used to measure the impact of scientific publications. Sourced from the Internet, Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) are complementary metrics that assess how often publications are discussed and used globally. We compared by rank the top 500 papers by CS and AAS published in Clinical Nutrition with corresponding AAS and CS., Methods: A search for all publications in Clinical Nutrition was performed on Dimensions (https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication) on 3rd April 2024. Outputs were ranked according to CS and then by AAS with the top 500 in each category selected. Scores, year and type of publication were recorded. Correlation was expressed as the Spearman's rank coefficient (ϱ)., Results: We identified 18,790 outputs. Within the top 500 publications ranked by CS, there was a significant weak positive correlation (ϱ = 0.235, P < 0.0001) between CS [median (IQR) 149 (116-223)] and AAS [7 (3-22)]. Ranked by AAS, there was a non-significant very weak positive correlation (ϱ = 0.072, P = 0.106) between AAS [55.5 (36-115)] and CS [42 (16.5-94.5)]. Trends remained similar when grouped by publication type. Guidelines, ranked by CS, had the highest CS and ranked by AAS, the highest CS and AAS. Publications per year, by year, ranked by CS, had a negatively skewed distribution peaking in 2012 and declined thereafter, but when ranked by AAS, had a moderately positive linear trend from 2001 to 2024 (ϱ = 0.513, P < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Correlation between CS and AAS was weak. Guidelines had the highest CS and AAS. CS are iterative taking years to mature while AAS are immediate., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest DNL has received an unrestricted educational grant from B. Braun for unrelated work. He has also received speaker's honoraria for unrelated work from Abbott, Nestlé and Corza. He is also an Associate Editor of Clinical Nutrition. No other competing interests declared., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)

In 2024, Cadernos de Saúde Pública (CSP) celebrates 40 years of uninterrupted publications. This article analyzes the trajectory of the journal and projects its future considering contemporary challenges in scientific publishing in the field of Public Health. This study was based on the analysis of main editorial policy milestones and the identification of the most popular topics. Three periods were recognized. In the "beginning" (1985 to 1990), the journal had restricted circulation, with a quarterly frequency. The word "epidemiology", used in a descriptive context, is highlighted. Then, in the period of "consolidation" (1991 to October 2012), CSP was indexed in the Index Medicus-MEDLINE database and had its online collection published by the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), expanding the reach of articles. In this period, the words that characterize the field of policy, planning, and management were clearly seen, and terms related to the epidemiological method emerged. The period of "diversity" (November 2012 to November 2023) introduced the requirement of an external editor to the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation's staff among the three co-editors-in-chief, aiming to ensure editorial independence. New activities and a similar frequency among the five most common terms highlight such "diversity". Several issues are observed in scientific publishing in 2024: non-commercial Open Science, artificial intelligence, appreciation of science, scientific dissemination, among others. Addressing new challenges in an ethical and transparent manner will allow future advances, maintaining CSP's credibility among authors and readers and its commitment to improvements in the living and health conditions of populations.

This study examines the influence of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding on the publication choices of dermatologists, particularly in terms of journal tiers and pay-to-publish (P2P) versus free-to-publish (F2P) models. Utilizing k-means clustering for journal ranking based on SCImago Journal Rank, h-index, and Impact Factor, journals were categorized into three tiers and 54,530 dermatology publications from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Authors were classified as Top NIH Funded or Non-Top NIH Funded according to Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research rankings. The study finds significant differences in publication patterns, with Top NIH Funded researchers in Tier I journals demonstrating a balanced use of P2P and F2P models, while they preferred F2P models in Tier II and III journals. Non-Top NIH Funded authors, however, opted for P2P models more frequently across all tiers. These data suggest NIH funding allows researchers greater flexibility to publish in higher-tier journals despite publication fees, while prioritizing F2P models in lower-tier journals. Such a pattern indicates that funding status plays a critical role in strategic publication decisions, potentially impacting research visibility and subsequent funding. The study's dermatology focus limits broader applicability, warranting further research to explore additional factors like geographic location, author gender, and research design., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: To analyze the average time between submission and acceptance of national journals in seven Brazilian surgery journals from 2017 to 2022., Methods: It consists of a cross-sectional and observational study with a quantitative approach to analyze the acceptance time of articles approved by Brazilian journals on general surgery and its subspecialties, including Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira, Jornal Vascular Brasileiro, Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia de Digestiva, Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Journal of Coloproctology, Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Plástica, and International Brazilian Journal of Urology., Results: The journals with the lowest average waiting times were Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira, and Journal of Coloproctology, respectively, and, with the lowest interquartile range there is Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira. There was no significant difference between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. The study designs with the highest and lowest means were, respectively, ideas and innovations - also with the highest interquartile range - and expert opinion, while with the lowest interquartile range was technical skill., Conclusions: The acceptance time for articles in Brazilian surgery journals is extremely variable. Identifying these discrepancies highlights the importance of understanding editorial processes and seeking ways to improve consistency and efficiency in reviewing articles.

Introduction: This study aimed to perform a bibliometric analysis examining contributing countries and collaborative networks, authors and collaborative relationships, the performance of the institutions, and cocited journals and references in 3 major orthodontic journals (American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, European Journal of Orthodontics, and Angle Orthodontist) over two 10-year periods (2002-2011 and 2012-2021)., Methods: In this study, 4432 publications in the first decade and 4012 publications in the second decade were quantitatively analyzed and visualized using visualization software such as VOSviewer (Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands), CiteSpace (Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pa), and Scimago Graphica (SCImago Lab, Spain)., Results: Institutions in the United States had the highest number of publications through the 2 decades, whereas Brazil, South Korea, and China achieved significant improvements in performance in the second decade compared with the first. Closer collaborative networks among scholars were revealed in the second decade. The cocitation analysis of the journals showed that highly cited journals included more professional orthodontic journals in the second decade than in the first decade., Conclusions: Bibliometric analysis of publications in 3 major orthodontic journals over two 10-year periods revealed a trend of diversification in countries and institutions participating in publishing, international collaborations, and collaboration networks among authors in the field of orthodontics during the 2 decades., (Copyright © 2024 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Sydney Declaration is an initiative led by an informal group of forensic scientists with diverse backgrounds. It offers a vision of forensic science based on the trace, as a vestige of a past event related to security or a possible law violation. An article published in Forensic Science International (FSI) introduces to this view [1]. Our investigation delves into how the forensic science literature has received this article (the SD article), nearly two years after its publication. One of the main challenges of this exploratory study was to define the appropriate scope of forensic scientific literature, within which the SD article must be located. In general, the publishing domain is quickly evolving, with many competing players, while still being structured around standard academic disciplines. The forensic literature, meanwhile, is scattered and poorly connected. This reflects the fragmentation of practice and research in forensic science, and the difficulty of situating a scientific activity in such a way as to bring out its forensic substance. Nonetheless, the SD article fills a gap. By deciphering the critical concept of trace, it highlights how pivotal forensic science is in addressing societal challenges. Scholarly literature expresses clear quantitative interest in the SD article. It has received significant qualitative citations on multiple levels and dimensions, in a highly relevant manner and in accordance with its aim of providing a forensic foundation for various debates that have been conducted separately, notably over the last fifteen years., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflict of interest to mention., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

In forensic anthropology, osteological sex estimation methods are continuously reevaluated and updated to improve classification accuracies. Therefore, to gain a comprehensive understanding of recent trends in sex estimation research in forensic anthropology, a content analysis of articles published between 2000 and 2022 in Forensic Science International, the Journal of Forensic Sciences, the International Journal of Legal Medicine, the American Journal of Biological Anthropology, and Forensic Anthropology, was performed. The main goals of this content analysis were to (1) examine trends in metric versus morphological research, (2) examine which areas of the skeleton have been explored, (3) examine which skeletal collections and population affinities have been most frequently utilized, and (4) determine which statistical methods were commonly implemented. A total of 440 articles were coded utilizing MAXQDA and the resulting codes were exported for analysis. Statistical analyses were conducted utilizing the Cochran-Armitage and Jonckheere-Terpstra tests for trends, as well as Fisher-Freeman-Halton tests. The results demonstrate that sex estimation research published in these journals has prioritized metric over morphological methods. Further, the most utilized skeletal regions continue to be the skull and pelvis, while the most popular classification statistics continue to be discriminant function analysis and logistic regression. This study also demonstrates that a substantial portion of research has been conducted utilizing U.S. and Europe-based collections and limited populations. Based on these results, future sex estimation research must continue exploring the use of long bones and other postcranial elements, testing newer methods of analysis, as well as developing population-inclusive methods., (© 2024 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.)

Bibliometric analysis plays a crucial role in elucidating publication trends and aids scholars in gauging the reach of prospective journals for their research dissemination. Concerns with impact factor (IF) have led us to examine the trends in IF, corrected IF (cIF), and Citescore in orthopaedic journals from 2016 to 2021 and compare them with internal medicine and general surgery journals. Journal IF and cIF were obtained from Journal Citation Reports and Citescore data from the Elsevier Scopus database for the years 2016 to 2021. Orthopaedic journals were categorized, and 10 medicine and surgery journals were selected for comparison. Mean values were analyzed to identify trends. The study included 52 orthopaedic journals, evenly split between the United States and the rest of the world, predominantly publishing in English. Mean IF in orthopaedic journals increased from 1.93 (2016) to 2.78 (2021), with similar rises in cIF and Citescore. These trends were consistent in specialty and general orthopaedic journals. No significant differences were found in mean IF between these categories. Medicine and surgery journals also experienced significant IF increases. Orthopaedic journals have experienced growing esteem and extent from 2016 to 2021. Specialty and general orthopaedic journals showed parallel growth. Researchers can utilize this analysis for informed publishing decisions, potentially expanding their readership., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To study the impact of converting from subscription-based publishing to open access ("flipping") in three obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) journals., Methods: We compared original articles in three OBGYN journals during a matched subscription-based and open access publishing period. We analyzed citation metrics and country of authorship., Results: Overall, 1522 studies were included; of those, 869 (57.1%) were before flipping and 653 (42.9%) were after flipping. There was a decrease in publications by lower-middle income countries from 7.7% in subscription-based publishing to 1.8% in open access (P < 0.001). There was a decrease in the proportion of articles from South Asia (2.5% vs 0.5%), North America (14.4% vs 9.4%), and the Middle East (7.4% vs 2.5%), and an increase in publications from East Asia and Pacific (17.4% vs 30.9%; P < 0.001). The relative citation ratio was higher in the open access period (median 1.65 vs 0.95, P < 0.001). The number of citations per year was higher in the open access period (median 3.0 vs 2.0, P < 0.001). There was an increase in the proportion of funded studies (from 40.2% to 47.8%; P = 0.003)., Conclusions: Flipping to open access in OBGYN journals is associated with a citation advantage with major authorship changes, leading to inequity., (© 2024 The Authors. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.)

The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a widely used metric for ranking journals based on the number of citations garnered by papers published over a specific timeframe. To assess the accuracy of JIF values, I compared citation counts for 30 of my own publications across six major bibliography databases: CrossRef, Web of Science, Publisher records, Google Scholar, PubMed and Scopus. The analysis revealed noteworthy variations in citation counts, ranging from 10% to over 50% between the lowest and highest citation counts. Google Scholar records the highest citation numbers, while PubMed reported the lowest. Notably, Web of Science, whose citation data are used in JIF calculations, tend to underestimate citation counts compared to other databases. These observations raise concerns about the accuracy of JIF calculation based on Web of Science's citation data. The real JIF values for most journals would differ from those annually reported by Clarivate's journal citation reports (JCR). These citation discrepancies underscore the importance of comprehensive data collection and the necessity to include additional citation sources. Not because a paper is cited in one journal rather than another should it have a less or more citation weight. Ultimately, one citation remains one citation, regardless of its origin. Clarivate Analytics may thus need to consider integrating all citation sources for more accurate JIF values. Alternatively, Google Scholar could potentially develop its own journal or citation impact based on its extensive journal citation records. However, while making adjustments to how the Journal Impact Factor is calculated can make it more mathematically precise, it doesn't address the fundamental biases built into the metric. Even with refinements, the Journal Impact Factor will remain skewed due to how it's defined and used.

Objective: The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) stands out as one of the most prominent international journals publishing research in esthetic dentistry. This study analyzed articles published by JERD since the year 2000 through bibliometric analysis., Methodology: The search was conducted in January 2024 using Scopus. The following data were extracted from the articles: citation count, year, language, access type, funding agency, study design, theme (general and specific), country, institution, authors, and keywords. The VOSviewer software was used to generate collaborative network maps among the data. Dimensions were consulted to measure altmetric data. Google Trends was used to investigate the global popularity of JERD research., Results: A total of 1394 articles were included in this analysis. Citation count ranged from 0 to 625 (average: 16.9). Articles were published between 2000 and 2023. Laboratory studies were more prevalent (n = 850), with the most investigated general theme being restorative procedures (n = 882), and the highlighted specific theme being the use of composite resin (n = 327). The United States had the highest number of articles (n = 640), with the diverse distribution among other countries. The most common keyword was "cad/cam" (n = 63). VOSviewer demonstrated high collaboration among countries. Intense mentions were identified primarily on Facebook. According to Google Trends, Egypt was the country that searched for JERD the most., Conclusions: JERD exhibited significant growth in the number of published articles and their diversity by topics, types, origin (country), number of citations, and impact factor., Clinical Significance: The JERD is a journal that publishes studies influencing clinical practice. Identifying the key characteristics of this journal is essential for charting future paths., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The increase in authors per scientific article in many different medical and scientific disciplines has raised concerns over ethical authorship. Trends in authorship in dermatopathology are unknown., Methods: Cross-sectional study of a random sample of 200 articles from the Journal of Cutaneous Pathology (1981-2020)., Results: The number of authors per article increased by an estimated 96% between 1981 and 2020 (2.7-5.3), while the relative citation ratio decreased by an estimated 56% during the same period (1.19-0.52). Higher author counts were not associated with higher relative citation ratios (p = 0.2349) or analytic study designs (p = 0.2987). Higher relative citation ratios were associated with analytic study designs (p = 0.0374)., Conclusions: There has been significant growth in authorship credit at the journal without a corresponding increase in research impact or study rigor. Remedial measures to stem authorship inflation and promote more impactful studies may be necessary., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Evidence based practice relies on availability of research evidence mostly through peer-reviewed journal publications. No consensus currently exists on the best hierarchy of research evidence, often categorised by the adopted research designs. Analysing the prevalent research designs in radiography professional journals is one vital step in considering an evidence hierarchy specific to the radiography profession and this forms the aim of this study., Methods: Bibliometric data of publications in three Radiography professional journals within a 10-year period were extracted. The Digital Object Identifier were used to locate papers on publishers' websites and obtain relevant data for analysis. Descriptive analysis using frequencies and percentages were used to represent data while Chi-square was used to analyse relationship between categorical variables., Results: 1830 articles met the pre-set inclusion criteria. Quantitative descriptive studies were the most published design (26.6%) followed by non-RCT experimental studies (18.7%), while Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT) were the least published (1.0%). Systematic reviews (42.9%) showed the highest average percentage increase within the 10-year period, however RCTs showed no net increase. Single-centre studies predominated among experimental studies (RCT = 88.9%; Non-RCT = 95%). Author collaboration across all study designs was notable, with RCTs showing the most (100%). Quantitative and qualitative studies comparatively had similar number of citations when publication numbers were matched. Quantitative descriptive studies had the highest cumulative citations while RCTs had the least., Conclusion: There is a case to advocate for more study designs towards the peak of evidence hierarchies such as systematic reviews and RCT. Radiography research should be primarily designed to answer pertinent questions and improve the validity of the profession's evidence base., Implication for Practice: The evidence presented can encourage the adoption of the research designs that enhances radiography profession's evidence base., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement There is no conflict of interest to disclose., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Open access (OA) publishing provides free online access to research articles without subscription fees. In Brazil, absence of financial support from academic institutions and limited government policies pose challenges to OA publication. Here, we used data from the Web of Science and Scopus to compare with global trends in journal accessibility and scientific quality metrics. Brazilian authors publish more OA articles, particularly in Global South journals. While OA correlates with quality for global authors, it had no impact on Brazilian science. To maximize impact, Brazilian authors should prioritize Q1 journals regardless of OA status. High-impact or Global North journal publication seems more relevant for Brazilian science than OA. Our findings indicate that the present open access policy has been ineffective to improve the impact of Brazilian science, providing insights to guide the formulation of scientific public policies.

Objective: To analyze the characteristics of highly-cited papers in Chinese Journal of Epidemiology from 2020 to 2023, and provide a basis for subsequent paper solicitation and identify research hotspots. Methods: On December 9, 2023, the citation frequency of each paper in Chinese Journal of Epidemiology from 2020 to 2023 was obtained from China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The total citation frequency of each paper was sorted using Excel 2016 software, and papers with citation frequency ≥30 were extracted for analysis. The keywords of the papers and Contents in Brief were analyzed. Results: A total of 1 317 papers were included in the analysis, of which 389, 342, 308 and 278 papers were included from 2020 to 2023. The total citation frequency was 11 873, and all papers were cited with an average citation frequency of 9. The keywords with high citation frequency in the papers included 2019-nCoV, hypertension, colorectal tumor, hand-foot-mouth disease, hepatitis B. and the average frequency of citation were 162, 77, 62, 51 and 47, respectively. There were 15 highly cited Contents in Brief in total, 11 of which are vital Contents in Brief or unique Contents in Brief, including Response to COVID-19 Epidemic, China Kadoorie Biobank, Epidemiological Research on Infectious Diseases, Healthy Ageing, Colorectal Cancer Prevention and Control, Prevention and Control of Hepatitis B, Quality Assessment of Cancer Screening Guidelines and Consensus, The 40 th Anniversary of Chinese Journal of Epidemiology , Expert Forum, Review, Standard-Protocol-Guide. The total citation frequency was 3 951, accounting for 72.6% (3 951/5 438) of highly cited papers. Conclusions: In the past four years, the highly cited papers of this journal mainly focused on the research field of emerging infectious diseases and chronic diseases. The response to the 2019-nCoV epidemic highlights the academic leading role. The effect of selecting and planning a topic, commissioning authors to write on given topics and making an arrangement in advance with a subject for contribution to vital Contents in Brief or unique Contents in Brief of this journal is pronounced, and the academic influence of the journal continues to improve.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated a significant transformation of scientific journals. Our aim was to determine how critical care (CC) journals and their impact may have evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the impact, as measured by citations and publications, from the field of CC would increase., Design: Observational study of journal publications, citations, and retractions status., Setting: All work was done electronically and retrospectively., Subjects: The top 18 CC journals broadly concerning CC, and the top 5 most productive CC journals on the SCImago list., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: For the top 18 CC journals and specifically Critical Care Medicine (CCM), time series analysis was used to estimate the trends of total citations, citations per publication, and publications per year by using the best-fit curve. We used PubMed and Retraction Watch to determine the number of COVID-19 publications and retractions. The average total citations and citations per publication for all journals was an upward quadratic trend with inflection points in 2020, whereas publications per year spiked in 2020 before returning to prepandemic values in 2021. For CCM total publications trend downward while total citations and citations per publication generally trend up from 2017 onward. CCM had the lowest percentage of COVID-related publications (15.7%) during the pandemic and no reported retractions. Two COVID-19 retractions were noted in our top five journals., Conclusions: Citation activity across top CC journals underwent a dramatic increase during the COVID-19 pandemic without significant retraction data. These trends suggest that the impact of CC has grown significantly since the onset of COVID-19 while maintaining adherence to a high-quality peer-review process., Competing Interests: The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

To carry out an in-depth analysis of the scientific research on autoimmunity, we performed the first bibliometric analysis focusing on publications in journals dedicated to autoimmunity (JDTA) indexed by science citation index during the period 2004-2023. Using bibliometric analysis, we quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed the country, institution, author, reference and keywords information of publications in JDTA, so as to understand the quantity, publication pattern and publication characteristics of these publications. The co-occurrence networks, clustering map and timeline map were created by CiteSpace and VOSviewer software to visualize the results. The CiteSpace was also used to analyze the strongest citation burst of keywords, which could describe the frequency, intensity and time period of high-frequency keywords, and indicate the research hotspots in the field. A total of 5 710 publications were analyzed, and their annual distribution number was basically stable from 2004 to 2023, fluctuating around 300. The United States and Italy led the way in terms of the number of publications, followed by France and China. For international cooperation, the developed countries represented by the United States cooperate more closely, but the cooperation was localized, reflecting that there was no unified model of autoimmunity among countries. UDICE-French Research Universities had the greatest number of publications. Subsequently, the number of publications decreased slowly with the ranking, and the gradient was not large. Eric Gershwin and Yehuda Shoenfeld stood out among the authors. They had an excellent academic reputation and great influence in the field of autoimmunity. The results of keyword analysis showed that JDTA publications mainly studied a variety of autoimmune diseases, especially SLE and RA. At the same time, JDTA publications also paid special attention to the research of cell function, autoantibody expression, animal experiments, disease activity, pathogenesis and treatment. This study is the first to analyze the publications in JDTA from multiple indicators by bibliometrics, thus providing new insights into the research hotspots and development trends in the field of autoimmunity., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: While Open Access (OA) journals provide free access to articles, they entail high article processing charges (APC), limiting opportunities for young researchers and those from low-middle income countries to publish OA., Methods: Cross-sectional study, evaluating APC and academic impact of full OA (FOA) journals in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) compared to hybrid journals. Data were collected from Journal Citation Reports and journals' websites., Results: Among 255 journals, median APC was 2850 (interquartile range [IQR] 1325-3654$). Median APC for 120 FOA journals was significantly lower than for 119 hybrid journals (2000, IQR 648-2767$ versus 3550, IQR 2948-4120$, p < 0.001). FOA journals had lower citation numbers and impact metrics compared to hybrid journals., Conclusion: While FOA ID/CM journals have lower APCs, they also lower academic impact compared to hybrid journals. These findings highlight the need for reforms in the publication process in view of achieving equitable data dissemination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study aims to demonstrate the capacity of natural language processing and topic modeling to manage and interpret the vast quantities of scholarly publications in the landscape of stroke research. These tools can expedite the literature review process, reveal hidden themes, and track rising research areas., Materials and Methods: Our study involved reviewing and analyzing articles published in five prestigious stroke journals, namely Stroke, International Journal of Stroke, European Stroke Journal, Translational Stroke Research, and Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases. The team extracted document titles, abstracts, publication years, and citation counts from the Scopus database. BERTopic was chosen as the topic modeling technique. Using linear regression models, current stroke research trends were identified. Python 3.1 was used to analyze and visualize data., Results: Out of the 35,779 documents collected, 26,732 were classified into 30 categories and used for analysis. "Animal Models," "Rehabilitation," and "Reperfusion Therapy" were identified as the three most prevalent topics. Linear regression models identified "Emboli," "Medullary and Cerebellar Infarcts," and "Glucose Metabolism" as trending topics, whereas "Cerebral Venous Thrombosis," "Statins," and "Intracerebral Hemorrhage" demonstrated a weaker trend., Conclusions: The methodology can assist researchers, funders, and publishers by documenting the evolution and specialization of topics. The findings illustrate the significance of animal models, the expansion of rehabilitation research, and the centrality of reperfusion therapy. Limitations include a five-journal cap and a reliance on high-quality metadata., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Diverse representation in the field of patient blood management (PBM) may help bring varying perspectives to improve patient care. We assessed trends in gender of first and last authorship of recent PBM publications to evaluate diversity within the field., Methods: Publications from 10 high-impact anesthesiology and blood transfusion medicine journals between 2017 and 2021 were reviewed using 19 keywords to identify PBM-related articles. Each publication title was reviewed independently to determine whether it met the inclusion criteria. A software program was used to identify the gender of each first and last author for the most common first names. Author gender that could not be identified through this process was determined by querying institutional websites and professional social networks (eg, ResearchGate). Any publication where the gender of the first and/or last author could not be reliably determined was excluded from the analysis. Trends over time were assessed using the Cochran-Armitage test., Results: A total of 2467 publications met the inclusion criteria of the 2873 yielded by the initial search. Gender of the first and last author was identified for 2384 of these publications and included in the final analysis. Approximately 42.8% of publications featured a woman as the first author with the highest from the journals such as the Journal of the American Medical Association ( JAMA ) (48.7%) and Transfusion (48.1%) and the lowest from the journals such as the British Journal of Anaesthesia (24.1%) and Anesthesia & Analgesia (24.4%). Approximately 32.0% of the publications featured a woman as the last author with the highest being Transfusion (36.9%) and Anaesthesia (31.8%) and the lowest being Anesthesia and Analgesia (18.3%) and Anesthesiology (18.6%). Approximately 57.6% of publications had either a woman as the first or last author while 16.3% of the publications had women as both the first and last authors. Women authors comprised 32.6% of the publications with a single author. Women as the first or last authors did not change significantly over the study period ( P = .115 and P = .119, respectively). No significant difference was observed in the percentage of PBM articles with a woman as the first or last author, a woman as the first and last author, or a woman as a single author from 2017 to 2021 ( P = .089, P = .055, and P = .226, respectively)., Conclusions: The percentage of women as the first and last authors in PBM publications from the 5-year period of 2017 to 2021 was <50%. Gender equity in PBM authorship was identified as an area for potential future improvement. International mentorship and sponsorship of women remain important in promoting gender equity in PBM authorship., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the research trends of the Korean Journal of Medical Education (KJME) since it became an English-language journal., Methods: A total of 274 articles published in KJME from 2016 to 2023 were analyzed. All article types were included in the analysis. NetMiner ver. 4.0 (Cyram Inc., Korea) was used for the main keyword and topic modeling analysis., Results: Of the 274 articles, 170 (62%) and 104 (38%) were by domestic and international authors, respectively. The main keywords with high frequency were "students," "learning," "experience," "pandemic," and "perception." Three topics were derived using topic matching analysis: "residents' perception and attitude of the pandemic," "assessment of learning and achievement," and "learning experiences in the pandemic.", Conclusion: Since the shift to English-language journals, medical education research has witnessed an increase in the number of articles published by international authors. Research on postgraduate education has increased. Research topics are relevant to situations such as the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. These findings can help researchers select research topics and encourage them to submit their research to the journal.

Background: Considering evidence of closing the gender gap in dental scholarship, this study assessed women's participation as authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board for The Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) from 2000 through 2022., Methods: The study authors downloaded author names from PubMed and retrieved names of reviewers and editorial board members from JADA's pages. The authors used Gender-API software to determine gender on the basis of first names. They used logistic regression to test for trends., Results: From January 2000 through December 2022, there were 2,935 full-length articles, 2,775 reviewers, 4 editors in chief, and 85 editorial board members. The percentage of women authors increased by 1.2% annually (95% CI, 1.03% to 1.33%), reaching 47% in 2022. First authorship increased by 2.1% annually (95% CI, 1.84% to 2.39%) and has been at more than 50% since 2016. In articles with multiple authors, there was a modest increase; second authorship increased 0.7% annually (95% CI, 0.36% to 1.09%) and last authorship by 0.7% (95% CI, 0.03% to 1.00%). Women reviewers increased 0.8% annually (95% CI, 0.68% to 0.97%), but the percentage of women on the editorial board did not increase significantly and was 41% in 2022., Conclusions: It was anticipated that 50% of JADA authors would be women by 2024. However, women are still underrepresented on the editorial board. A comprehensive effort is needed to foster role models, provide mentorship opportunities for women, and support women's professional advancement in dental research and publications., Practical Implications: Gender-based disparities affect women in dental education and clinical practice. Serving as an editorial board member, reviewer, or author can affect academic promotion and the type of scientific investigation being conducted and indirectly affects women's health outcomes., Competing Interests: Disclosures None of the authors reported any disclosures., (Copyright © 2024 American Dental Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background:  Lung transplantation (LT) has recently emerged as a scientifically validated curative therapeutic modality for patients afflicted with end-stage lung disease. This study aimed to conduct a global bibliometric analysis of research articles on LT between 1983 and 2021., Methods:  Employing the Web of Science database, a bibliometric analysis was conducted to assess the expansion of scientific output within the field of LT. We searched specific bibliometric characteristics such as language, and year of publication, first author, institutional affiliation, main publishing journals, and highly cited articles. Additionally, we made comparisons of the most productive countries. The VOSviewer program and the open-source visualization software Biblioshiny (version 2.0) were used to perform the bibliometric analysis., Results:  We identified 10,467 articles on LT published between 1983 and 2021, of which 94.898% were published in the Science Citation Index Expanded. The articles were from 101 different research areas. The publications were from 81 different countries globally, and mostly from the United States (41.196%), Germany (7.118%), and Canada (6.372%). The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation was the most published journal. Four thousand seven hundred and ninety three of the publications were published in the last 10 years with a 78,781 citation number in total. The highest number of publications and citations was in 2021., Conclusion:  The majority of cutting-edge research findings are focused on only a few developed nations, and exchanges with emerging nations are still in their infancy. The United States has a strong, commanding position among the active countries in LT., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To characterize the neuro-ophthalmology publishing trends of the top general clinical ophthalmology and neurology journals and to report (i) the proportion of articles that are neuro-ophthalmology focused and (ii) the correlation between annual proportion of neuro-ophthalmology-focused articles and annual proportion of neuro-ophthalmologist journal editors., Design: Retrospective database review., Materials: Articles in the top 5 general clinical ophthalmology and neurology journals., Methods: Publications from 2012 through 2021 were retrieved from Embase and classified as teaching or nonteaching articles based on journal indexing. Duplicate screening was conducted to further categorize articles as either focused or not focused on neuro-ophthalmology., Results: The titles, abstracts, and (or) full texts of 34,660 articles were reviewed. The total proportions of nonteaching articles and teaching articles focused on neuro-ophthalmology were 3.4% and 13.8%, respectively. Neuro-ophthalmology contributions to nonteaching and teaching publications were greater among the ophthalmology journals (4.0% and 15.2%) than among the neurology journals (2.6% and 13.3%). There were no clear trends in the annual proportion of neuro-ophthalmology-focused articles across the 10-year period. The annual proportion of neuro-ophthalmologist journal editors was positively correlated with annual neuro-ophthalmology output for teaching articles (Pearson's r = 0.541; p < 0.001) but not articles unrelated to teaching (Pearson's r = 0.067; p = 0.598)., Conclusions: Our study found that there was a lower prevalence of neuro-ophthalmology papers in high-impact-factor general clinical ophthalmology and neurology journals over the last 10 years. It is important to have good representation of neuro-ophthalmology studies in such journals to promote best neuro-ophthalmic practices among all clinicians., (Copyright © 2023 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This work sought to identify the academic communities that have shown interest and participation in the Journal Research and Education in Nursing and analyze the scientific impact generated by said journal., Methods: A bibliometric analysis was carried out, as well as social network analysis and techniques of natural language processing to conduct the research. The data was gathered and analyzed during a specific study period, covering from 2010 - 2020, for articles published in the journal, and 2010 - 2022, for articles that cited the journal within Scopus. These methods permitted performing an exhaustive evaluation of the journal's influence and reach in diverse academic and geographic contexts., Results: During the analysis, it was noted that the journal Research and Education in Nursing has had significant influence in academic and scientific communities, both nationally and internationally. Collaboration networks were detected among diverse institutions and countries, which indicates active interaction in the field of nursing research. In addition, trends and emerging patterns were identified in this field, providing a more complete view of the discipline's evolution., Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, it is concluded that the journal Research and Education in Nursing has played un fundamental role in disseminating knowledge and promoting research in nursing. The combination of Bibliometric metrics, social network analysis, and natural language processing permitted utmost comprehension of its impact in the scientific and academic community globally., Competing Interests: The authors of this article and the planning committee members and staff have no relevant financial relationships with commercial interests to disclose., (Copyright� by the Universidad de Antioquia.)

Background: As an important platform for researchers to present their academic findings, medical journals have a close relationship between their evaluation orientation and the value orientation of their published research results. However, the differences between the academic impact and level of disruptive innovation of medical journals have not been examined by any study yet., Objective: This study aims to compare the relationships and differences between the academic impact, disruptive innovation levels, and peer review results of medical journals and published research papers. We also analyzed the similarities and differences in the impact evaluations, disruptive innovations, and peer reviews for different types of medical research papers and the underlying reasons., Methods: The general and internal medicine Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) journals in 2018 were chosen as the study object to explore the differences in the academic impact and level of disruptive innovation of medical journals based on the OpenCitations Index of PubMed open PMID-to-PMID citations (POCI) and H1Connect databases, respectively, and we compared them with the results of peer review., Results: First, the correlation coefficients of the Journal Disruption Index (JDI) with the Journal Cumulative Citation for 5 years (JCC 5 ), Journal Impact Factor (JIF), and Journal Citation Indicator (JCI) were 0.677, 0.585, and 0.621, respectively. The correlation coefficient of the absolute disruption index (Dz) with the Cumulative Citation for 5 years (CC 5 ) was 0.635. However, the average difference in the disruptive innovation and academic influence rankings of journals reached 20 places (about 17.5%). The average difference in the disruptive innovation and influence rankings of research papers reached about 2700 places (about 17.7%). The differences reflect the essential difference between the two evaluation systems. Second, the top 7 journals selected based on JDI, JCC 5 , JIF, and JCI were the same, and all of them were H-journals. Although 8 (8/15, 53%), 96 (96/150, 64%), and 880 (880/1500, 58.67%) of the top 0.1%, top 1%, and top 10% papers selected based on Dz and CC 5 , respectively, were the same. Third, research papers with the "changes clinical practice" tag showed only moderate innovation (4.96) and impact (241.67) levels but had high levels of peer-reviewed recognition (6.00) and attention (2.83)., Conclusions: The results of the study show that research evaluation based on innovative indicators is detached from the traditional impact evaluation system. The 3 evaluation systems (impact evaluation, disruptive innovation evaluation, and peer review) only have high consistency for authoritative journals and top papers. Neither a single impact indicator nor an innovative indicator can directly reflect the impact of medical research for clinical practice. How to establish an integrated, comprehensive, scientific, and reasonable journal evaluation system to improve the existing evaluation system of medical journals still needs further research., (©Yuyan Jiang, Xue-li Liu, Zixuan Zhang, Xinru Yang. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 31.05.2024.)