Integrative Approach to Quality Assessment of Medical Journals Using Impact Factor, Eigenfactor, and Article Influence Scores

BACKGROUND: Impact factor (IF) is a commonly used surrogate for assessing the scientific quality of journals and articles. There is growing discontent in the medical community with the use of this quality assessment tool because of its many inherent limitations. To help address such concerns, Eigenfactor (ES) and Article Influence scores (AIS) have been devised to assess scientific impact of journals. The principal aim was to compare the temporal trends in IF, ES, and AIS on the rank order of leading medical journals over time. METHODS: The 2001 to 2008 IF, ES, AIS, and number of citable items (CI) of 35 leading medical journals were collected from the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI) and the http://www.eigenfactor.org databases. The journals were ranked based on the published 2008 ES, AIS, and IF scores. Temporal score trends and variations were analyzed. RESULTS: In general, the AIS and IF values provided similar rank orders. Using ES values resulted in large changes in the rank orders with higher ranking being assigned to journals that publish a large volume of articles. Since 2001, the IF and AIS of most journals increased significantly; however the ES increased in only 51% of the journals in the analysis. Conversely, 26% of journals experienced a downward trend in their ES, while the rest experienced no significant changes (23%). This discordance between temporal trends in IF and ES was largely driven by temporal changes in the number of CI published by the journals. CONCLUSION: The rank order of medical journals changes depending on whether IF, AIS or ES is used. All of these metrics are sensitive to the number of citable items published by journals. Consumers should thus consider all of these metrics rather than just IF alone in assessing the influence and importance of medical journals in their respective disciplines

Absent right and persistent left superior vena cava: troubleshooting during a challenging pacemaker implant: a case report

Article deposited according to publisher policies: http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/copyright July 30, 2014.YesFunding provided by the Open Access Authors Fund

Propositions théoriques pour une méthode d’analyses sociologiques des discours

L’auteur propose de désigner les deux paradigmes fondamentaux dont l’explicitation et l’articulation lui semblent nécessaires (mais non suffisantes) pour impulser un véritable tournant sociologique aux analyses de discours que pratiquent nos collègues sociologues français, souvent sous influence sociolinguistique et/ou sous influence informatique et statistique - notamment lorsqu’il s’agit de pratiques lexicométriques. Le premier est le paradigme des « instances de pratiques discursives » en interaction mutuelle au sein d’un dispositif « circulatoire ». Le second est le paradigme des quatre principaux « registres de sens » ou « dimensions constitutives fondamentales » de toute expression discursive-langagière. Pour chacun de ces paradigmes les applications méthodologiques sont brièvement illustrées. Enfin, cette réflexion méthodologique ne peut pas ne pas interroger également les présupposés de la dimension temporelle, et ce à partir de la philosophie ontogénétique de Gilbert Simondon, et ne peut pas ne pas évoquer le paradigme des rapports fondamentaux de dominance sociale - que l’auteur considère comme constitutif de toute problématique sociologique.The author proposes to designate two fundamental paradigms whose explicitation and articulation appear to be required (though not sufficient) to enable a genuine sociological turn to discourse analyses practiced by French sociologists, often influenced either by sociolinguistics and/or by computing and statistics-especially when it comes to lexicometric practices. The first is the paradigm of "instances of discursive practices" in mutual interaction within a "circulatory" system. The second is the paradigm of the four main "meaning registers"  or "fundamental constituent dimensions" of any discursive-linguistic expression. For each of these paradigms, methodological applications are briefly illustrated. Finally, this methodological reflection can not avoid questioning the assumptions of the temporal dimension, and so through the ontogenetic philosophy of Gilbert Simondon, and can not fail to mention the fundamental paradigm of social dominance relationships-considered by the author as constituting any sociological problem.El autor propone designar los dos paradigmas fundamentales cuales su explicación y articulación les parece necesarias, pero no suficiente, para impulsar un verdadero turno sociológico en los análisis de discurso que practican nuestros colegas franceses, usualmente bajo la influencia sociolinguistica y/o bajo la influencia informática y estadística – particularmente cuando se trata de prácticas lexicométricas. El primero es el paradigma de "las instancias de prácticas discursivas" en interacción mutua a dentro de un dispositivo "circulatorio". El secundo es el paradigma de los cuatros principales "registros de sentido" o "dimensiones constitutivas fundamentales" de toda expresión relativa al discurso y al lenguaje. Se ejemplifica la explicación de cada paradigma. Finalmente, esta reflexión metodológica tiene que examinar los presupuestos de la dimensión temporal a partir de la filosofía ontogenética de Gilbert Simondon además que evocar el paradigma de los enlaces fundamentales de la dominación social la cual el autor considera constitutiva de toda problemática sociológica

Journal Rankings Based On Their 2008 Eigenfactor, Impact Factor and the Article Influence Score.

<p>Data presented as value (column rank).</p

The Relationship of Changes in Citable Items Between 2001 and 2008 to Changes in Eigenfactor Score and Impact Factor Between 2001 and 2008.

<p>R² = 0.1957; p = 0.0099 for the relationship between changes in citable items and changes in Eigenfactor score and R² = 0.1216; p = 0.0505* for the relationship between changes in citable items and changes in the impact factor. *The <i>New England Journal of Medicine</i> was excluded from the regression analysis, as it was an extreme outlier.</p

Temporal Trends in Eigenfactor Score of Common Medical Journals Between 2001 and 2008.

§<p>n/a  =  not available.</p><p>Significant increase over time denoted by (↑), while significant decrease is denoted (↓).</p