Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:19:05.682Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Citation analysis of otorhinolaryngology journals: follow-up study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2015

D H Coelho ,
L W Edelmayer  and
J E Fenton
D H Coelho*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, USA
L W Edelmayer
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, USA
J E Fenton
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Limerick, Ireland Graduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Ireland
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Daniel H Coelho, Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, PO Box 980146, Richmond, Virginia 23298-0146, USA Fax: +1 804 828 5799, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

This study aimed to evaluate the changes in impact factors of otorhinolaryngology journals over the past 15 years.

Method:

Using the online edition of Journal Citation Reports, standard (2-year) and 5-year impact factors were calculated for the leading 15 journals.

Results:

The results were compared with the impact factors for 1998. The average standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor increased by 2.72 and 2.05 fold respectively when compared with 1998. The average 2012 standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor were 1.82 and 1.99 respectively, reflecting a 9.3 per cent difference. The average 1998 standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor were 0.67 and 0.97 respectively, reflecting a 44.8 per cent difference. The Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology had the highest standard and five-year impact factors.

Conclusion:

These data may indicate changing clinical and research interests within our field, as well as increased speed and ease with which the internet has allowed citation. As a result, five-year intervals may no longer be necessary to adequately gauge journal impact.

Keywords

Journal Impact FactorOtolaryngologyBibliometrics
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 129 , Issue 5 , May 2015 , pp. 489 - 493
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Callaham, M, Wears, R, Weber, E.Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 2002;287:2847–50CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Garfield, E.How can impact factors be improved? BMJ 1996;313:411–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Roy, D, Hughes, JP, Jones, AS, Fenton, JE.Citation analysis of otorhinolaryngology journals. J Laryngol Otol 2002;116:363–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Coelho, DH, Edelmayer, LW, Fenton, JE.A century of citation classics in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery journals revisited. Laryngoscope 2014;124:1358–62CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Oosthuizen, J, Fenton, J.Alternatives to the impact factor. Surgeon 2014;12:239–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Garfield, E.Journal impact factor: a brief review. CMAJ 1999;161:979–80Google ScholarPubMed
7Chew, M, Villanueva, E, Van Der Weyden, M.Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views. J R Soc Med 2007;100:142–50Google ScholarPubMed
8Bollen, J, Rodriguez, M, Van de Sompel, H.Journal status. Scientometrics 2006;69:669–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar