BACKGROUND: The monosialoganglioside (GM1) is a popular topic of research but the bibliometric analysis of GM1 over the decades in Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To ident...BACKGROUND: The monosialoganglioside (GM1) is a popular topic of research but the bibliometric analysis of GM1 over the decades in Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To identify the global research and to improve the understanding of research trends in the GM1 field from 1942 to 2011. DESIGN: A bibliometric study. DATA RETRIEVAL: We performed a bibliometric analysis based on the SCI-E published by the Institute of Scientific Information. INCLUSIVE CRITERIA: Articles closely related to GM1 were included. Exclusive criteria: (1) Articles related to gangliosidosis, disialo-ganglioside, trisialo-ganglioside or ganglioside GQIb. (2) Document types such as meeting abstracts, reviews, proceedings papers, notes, and letters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Type of publication output; (2) number of author outputs; (3) distribution of output in subject categories; (4) publication distribution of countries; (5) distribution of output in journals, and (6) distribution of citations in each decade. RESULTS: During 1942 to 2011, there were 10 126 papers on GM1 that were added to the SCI. Articles (8 004) were the most frequently used document type comprising 79.0%, followed by meeting abstracts, reviews and proceedings papers. Research on GM1 could be found in the SCI from 1942, it was developed in the 1970s, greatly increased in the 1980s, and reached a peak in the 1990s, and it was slightly decreased in 2000. The distribution of subject categories showed that GM1 research covered both clinical and basic science research. The USA, Japan, and Germany were the three most productive countries, and the publication numbers in the USA were highest in all decades. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, Journal of Neurochemistry and Biochemistry were core subject journals in GM1 studies in each decade. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the topics in GM1 research that are being published around the world.展开更多
Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine is included in Science Citation Index Expanded Journal List (SCl-E)from 2008 after a strict judgment process.In addition,this journal is also indexed and abstracted by Index Med...Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine is included in Science Citation Index Expanded Journal List (SCl-E)from 2008 after a strict judgment process.In addition,this journal is also indexed and abstracted by Index Medicus/PubMed,Chemical Abstract(CA),Excerpta Medica(EMBASE),Abstract展开更多
Purpose:Interdisciplinary fields have become the driving force of modern science and a significant source of scientific innovation.However,there is still a paucity of analysis about the essential characteristics of di...Purpose:Interdisciplinary fields have become the driving force of modern science and a significant source of scientific innovation.However,there is still a paucity of analysis about the essential characteristics of disciplines’cross-disciplinary impact.Design/methodology/approach:In this study,we define cross-disciplinary impact on one discipline as its impact to other disciplines,and refer to a three-dimensional framework of variety-balance-disparity to characterize the structure of cross-disciplinary impact.The variety of cross-disciplinary impact of the discipline was defined as the proportion of the high cross-disciplinary impact publications,and the balance and disparity of cross-disciplinary impact were measured as well.To demonstrate the cross-disciplinary impact of the disciplines in science,we chose Microsoft Academic Graph(MAG)as the data source,and investigated the relationship between disciplines’cross-disciplinary impact and their positions in the Hierarchy of Science(HOS).Findings:Analytical results show that there is a significant correlation between the ranking of cross-disciplinary impact and the HOS structure,and that the discipline exerts a greater cross-disciplinary impact on its neighboring disciplines.Several bibliometric features that measure the hardness of a discipline,including the number of references,the number of cited disciplines,the citation distribution,and the Price index have a significant positive effect on the variety of cross-disciplinary impact.The number of references,the number of cited disciplines,and the citation distribution have significant positive and negative effects on balance and disparity,respectively.It is concluded that the less hard the discipline,the greater the cross-disciplinary impact,the higher balance and the lower disparity of cross-disciplinary impact.Research limitations:In the empirical analysis of HOS,we only included five broad disciplines.This study also has some biases caused by the data source and applied regression models.Practical implications:This study contributes to the formulation of discipline-specific policies and promotes the growth of interdisciplinary research,as well as offering fresh insights for predicting the cross-disciplinary impact of disciplines.Originality/value:This study provides a new perspective to properly understand the mechanisms of cross-disciplinary impact and disciplinary integration.展开更多
Purpose:We study the proportion of Web of Science(WoS)citation links that are represented in the Crossref Open Citation Index(COCI),with the possible aim of using COCI in research evaluation instead of the WoS,if the ...Purpose:We study the proportion of Web of Science(WoS)citation links that are represented in the Crossref Open Citation Index(COCI),with the possible aim of using COCI in research evaluation instead of the WoS,if the level of coverage was sufficient.Design/methodology/approach:We calculate the proportion on citation links where both publications have a WoS accession number and a DOI simultaneously,and where the cited publications have had at least one author from our institution,the Czech Technical University in Prague.We attempt to look up each such citation link in COCI.Findings:We find that 53.7%of WoS citation links are present in the COCI.The proportion varies largely by discipline.The total figures differ significantly from 40%in the large-scale study by Van Eck,Waltman,Larivière,and Sugimoto(blog 2018,https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-r2s234).Research limitations:The sample does not cover all science areas uniformly;it is heavily focused on Engineering and Technology,and only some disciplines of Natural Sciences are present.However,this reflects the real scientific orientation and publication profile of our institution.Practical implications:The current level of coverage is not sufficient for the WoS to be replaced by COCI for research evaluation.Originality/value:The present study illustrates a COCI vs WoS comparison on the scale of a larger technical university in Central Europe.展开更多
Purpose: Communicating scientific results to the public is essential to inspire future researchers and ensure that discoveries are exploited. News stories about research are a key communication pathway for this and ha...Purpose: Communicating scientific results to the public is essential to inspire future researchers and ensure that discoveries are exploited. News stories about research are a key communication pathway for this and have been manually monitored to assess the extent of press coverage of scholarship.Design/methodology/Approach: To make larger scale studies practical, this paper introduces an automatic method to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals. Curated ProQuest queries were used to search for citations to 9,639 Science and3,412 Social Science Web of Science(WoS) journals from eight UK daily newspapers during2006–2015. False matches were automatically filtered out by a new program, with 94% of the remaining stories meaningfully citing research.Findings: Most Science(95%) and Social Science(94%) journals were never cited by these newspapers. Half of the cited Science journals covered medical or health-related topics,whereas 43% of the Social Sciences journals were related to psychiatry or psychology. From the citing news stories, 60% described research extensively and 53% used multiple sources,but few commented on research quality.Research Limitations: The method has only been tested in English and from the ProQuest Newspapers database.Practical implications: Others can use the new method to systematically harvest press coverage of research.Originality/value: An automatic method was introduced and tested to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals.展开更多
We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and ...We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and taking data differences between the Web of Science (WoS) and the JCR into account, we make our own predictions. Using data by cited-reference searching for Thomson Scientific's WoS, we predict 2007 impact factors (IFs) for several journals, such as Nature, Science, Learned Publishing and some Library and Information Sciences journals. Based on our colleagues' experiences we expect our predictions to be lower bounds for the official journal impact factors. We explain why it is useful to derive one's own journal impact factor.展开更多
Popular science tourism is a new tourism mode, and geopark scenic area is an important carrier of popular science tourism. It is the premise and foundation for the popular science tourism development of geoparks to es...Popular science tourism is a new tourism mode, and geopark scenic area is an important carrier of popular science tourism. It is the premise and foundation for the popular science tourism development of geoparks to establish a scientific evaluation index system and evaluation model. On the basis of analyzing relevant evaluation models, this paper explored the evaluation system and model of geopark popular science tourism in following steps. First, establish the index system. Based on the theory method, frequency method, and expert consultation method, this paper established the popular science tourism evaluation index system of geopark scenic area. The evaluation index system includes 3 primary indexes, 8 secondary indexes and 30 tertiary indexes. Second, define index weight and scoring standards. Index weights were defined using Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP), the measuring method of each index and the scoring standards were specified. Third, evaluation model and grade. The evaluation model of popular science tourism development was constructed, and the evaluation results were classified into 4 grades. Fourth, empirical study. The evaluation model was applied to measure and investigate popular science tourism of Henan Yuntain Mountain World Geopark, and the final score was 7.619, indicating a higher evaluation grade of popular science tourism of the park.展开更多
After three rounds of rigorous evaluation of core journals in gastroenterology andhepatology conducted by the Reference Citation Analysis (RCA) editorial team ofBaishideng Publishing Group (Baishideng), the RCA databa...After three rounds of rigorous evaluation of core journals in gastroenterology andhepatology conducted by the Reference Citation Analysis (RCA) editorial team ofBaishideng Publishing Group (Baishideng), the RCA database of Baishidengofficially released the 2022 Journal Article Influence Index (2022 JAII) of 101 corejournals in gastroenterology and hepatology, for the first time. The list of 101 corejournals can be found at: https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/Search-Journal. Among them, the highest 2022 JAII is 48.014 and the lowest is 3.900. Thisarticle highlights the top 20 journals, describes the calculation method for the 2022JAII, the evaluation process, and the inclusion principles for journals in the RCA.These steps are the underpinning of the RCA’s empirical journal academicevaluation service by which the digital platform addresses the needs of authors toselect reliable journals for submission, readers to select high-quality literature forreading, and editors to track their own journal citation performance. As such, theRCA core journal list will serve as a useful Find-a-Journal tool. Any interestedparty is welcome to use this journal list and recommend it to their peers.展开更多
After three rounds of rigorous evaluation of registered scholars conducted by the Reference Citation Analysis(RCA)editorial team of Baishideng Publishing Group(Baishideng),the RCA database of Baishideng officially rel...After three rounds of rigorous evaluation of registered scholars conducted by the Reference Citation Analysis(RCA)editorial team of Baishideng Publishing Group(Baishideng),the RCA database of Baishideng officially released the 2022 Article Influence Index(2022 AII)of 632 scholars from 74 countries/territories in 98 research categories,for the first time.The list of 632 scholars can be found at:https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/searchscholar.Among them,the highest 2022 AII is 348.211,the highest number of total citations is 42830,and the highest number of total articles is 901.The category with the largest number of RCA scholars is Gastroenterology&Hepatology,with a total of 100(15.8%),and the second is Surgery,with a total of 46(7.3%).This article summarizes the RCA scholars and describes the mission of RCA,the openness and transparency of RCA evaluation,the calculation method for the 2022 AII,and the evaluation process of RCA scholars.The RCA scholar list will effectively serve as a useful Find-a-Scholar tool.Any interested scholar is welcome to register and join this RCA scholar list.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND: The monosialoganglioside (GM1) is a popular topic of research but the bibliometric analysis of GM1 over the decades in Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To identify the global research and to improve the understanding of research trends in the GM1 field from 1942 to 2011. DESIGN: A bibliometric study. DATA RETRIEVAL: We performed a bibliometric analysis based on the SCI-E published by the Institute of Scientific Information. INCLUSIVE CRITERIA: Articles closely related to GM1 were included. Exclusive criteria: (1) Articles related to gangliosidosis, disialo-ganglioside, trisialo-ganglioside or ganglioside GQIb. (2) Document types such as meeting abstracts, reviews, proceedings papers, notes, and letters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Type of publication output; (2) number of author outputs; (3) distribution of output in subject categories; (4) publication distribution of countries; (5) distribution of output in journals, and (6) distribution of citations in each decade. RESULTS: During 1942 to 2011, there were 10 126 papers on GM1 that were added to the SCI. Articles (8 004) were the most frequently used document type comprising 79.0%, followed by meeting abstracts, reviews and proceedings papers. Research on GM1 could be found in the SCI from 1942, it was developed in the 1970s, greatly increased in the 1980s, and reached a peak in the 1990s, and it was slightly decreased in 2000. The distribution of subject categories showed that GM1 research covered both clinical and basic science research. The USA, Japan, and Germany were the three most productive countries, and the publication numbers in the USA were highest in all decades. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, Journal of Neurochemistry and Biochemistry were core subject journals in GM1 studies in each decade. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the topics in GM1 research that are being published around the world.
文摘Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine is included in Science Citation Index Expanded Journal List (SCl-E)from 2008 after a strict judgment process.In addition,this journal is also indexed and abstracted by Index Medicus/PubMed,Chemical Abstract(CA),Excerpta Medica(EMBASE),Abstract
基金funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(NSFC)Grant Nos.71921002 and 72174154.
文摘Purpose:Interdisciplinary fields have become the driving force of modern science and a significant source of scientific innovation.However,there is still a paucity of analysis about the essential characteristics of disciplines’cross-disciplinary impact.Design/methodology/approach:In this study,we define cross-disciplinary impact on one discipline as its impact to other disciplines,and refer to a three-dimensional framework of variety-balance-disparity to characterize the structure of cross-disciplinary impact.The variety of cross-disciplinary impact of the discipline was defined as the proportion of the high cross-disciplinary impact publications,and the balance and disparity of cross-disciplinary impact were measured as well.To demonstrate the cross-disciplinary impact of the disciplines in science,we chose Microsoft Academic Graph(MAG)as the data source,and investigated the relationship between disciplines’cross-disciplinary impact and their positions in the Hierarchy of Science(HOS).Findings:Analytical results show that there is a significant correlation between the ranking of cross-disciplinary impact and the HOS structure,and that the discipline exerts a greater cross-disciplinary impact on its neighboring disciplines.Several bibliometric features that measure the hardness of a discipline,including the number of references,the number of cited disciplines,the citation distribution,and the Price index have a significant positive effect on the variety of cross-disciplinary impact.The number of references,the number of cited disciplines,and the citation distribution have significant positive and negative effects on balance and disparity,respectively.It is concluded that the less hard the discipline,the greater the cross-disciplinary impact,the higher balance and the lower disparity of cross-disciplinary impact.Research limitations:In the empirical analysis of HOS,we only included five broad disciplines.This study also has some biases caused by the data source and applied regression models.Practical implications:This study contributes to the formulation of discipline-specific policies and promotes the growth of interdisciplinary research,as well as offering fresh insights for predicting the cross-disciplinary impact of disciplines.Originality/value:This study provides a new perspective to properly understand the mechanisms of cross-disciplinary impact and disciplinary integration.
文摘Purpose:We study the proportion of Web of Science(WoS)citation links that are represented in the Crossref Open Citation Index(COCI),with the possible aim of using COCI in research evaluation instead of the WoS,if the level of coverage was sufficient.Design/methodology/approach:We calculate the proportion on citation links where both publications have a WoS accession number and a DOI simultaneously,and where the cited publications have had at least one author from our institution,the Czech Technical University in Prague.We attempt to look up each such citation link in COCI.Findings:We find that 53.7%of WoS citation links are present in the COCI.The proportion varies largely by discipline.The total figures differ significantly from 40%in the large-scale study by Van Eck,Waltman,Larivière,and Sugimoto(blog 2018,https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-r2s234).Research limitations:The sample does not cover all science areas uniformly;it is heavily focused on Engineering and Technology,and only some disciplines of Natural Sciences are present.However,this reflects the real scientific orientation and publication profile of our institution.Practical implications:The current level of coverage is not sufficient for the WoS to be replaced by COCI for research evaluation.Originality/value:The present study illustrates a COCI vs WoS comparison on the scale of a larger technical university in Central Europe.
文摘Purpose: Communicating scientific results to the public is essential to inspire future researchers and ensure that discoveries are exploited. News stories about research are a key communication pathway for this and have been manually monitored to assess the extent of press coverage of scholarship.Design/methodology/Approach: To make larger scale studies practical, this paper introduces an automatic method to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals. Curated ProQuest queries were used to search for citations to 9,639 Science and3,412 Social Science Web of Science(WoS) journals from eight UK daily newspapers during2006–2015. False matches were automatically filtered out by a new program, with 94% of the remaining stories meaningfully citing research.Findings: Most Science(95%) and Social Science(94%) journals were never cited by these newspapers. Half of the cited Science journals covered medical or health-related topics,whereas 43% of the Social Sciences journals were related to psychiatry or psychology. From the citing news stories, 60% described research extensively and 53% used multiple sources,but few commented on research quality.Research Limitations: The method has only been tested in English and from the ProQuest Newspapers database.Practical implications: Others can use the new method to systematically harvest press coverage of research.Originality/value: An automatic method was introduced and tested to extract citations from newspaper stories to large sets of academic journals.
文摘We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and taking data differences between the Web of Science (WoS) and the JCR into account, we make our own predictions. Using data by cited-reference searching for Thomson Scientific's WoS, we predict 2007 impact factors (IFs) for several journals, such as Nature, Science, Learned Publishing and some Library and Information Sciences journals. Based on our colleagues' experiences we expect our predictions to be lower bounds for the official journal impact factors. We explain why it is useful to derive one's own journal impact factor.
基金Sponsored by National Natural Science Foundation of China(41301641)National Social Science Foundation of China(15BJY130)+1 种基金Open Project of Henan Collaborative Innovation Center of Central Plain Economic Zone Smart Tourism(2015-ZHLV-006,2015-ZHLV-002)2015"10,000 Tourism Talents Plan"of National Tourism Administration(WMYC20151037)
文摘Popular science tourism is a new tourism mode, and geopark scenic area is an important carrier of popular science tourism. It is the premise and foundation for the popular science tourism development of geoparks to establish a scientific evaluation index system and evaluation model. On the basis of analyzing relevant evaluation models, this paper explored the evaluation system and model of geopark popular science tourism in following steps. First, establish the index system. Based on the theory method, frequency method, and expert consultation method, this paper established the popular science tourism evaluation index system of geopark scenic area. The evaluation index system includes 3 primary indexes, 8 secondary indexes and 30 tertiary indexes. Second, define index weight and scoring standards. Index weights were defined using Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP), the measuring method of each index and the scoring standards were specified. Third, evaluation model and grade. The evaluation model of popular science tourism development was constructed, and the evaluation results were classified into 4 grades. Fourth, empirical study. The evaluation model was applied to measure and investigate popular science tourism of Henan Yuntain Mountain World Geopark, and the final score was 7.619, indicating a higher evaluation grade of popular science tourism of the park.
文摘After three rounds of rigorous evaluation of core journals in gastroenterology andhepatology conducted by the Reference Citation Analysis (RCA) editorial team ofBaishideng Publishing Group (Baishideng), the RCA database of Baishidengofficially released the 2022 Journal Article Influence Index (2022 JAII) of 101 corejournals in gastroenterology and hepatology, for the first time. The list of 101 corejournals can be found at: https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/Search-Journal. Among them, the highest 2022 JAII is 48.014 and the lowest is 3.900. Thisarticle highlights the top 20 journals, describes the calculation method for the 2022JAII, the evaluation process, and the inclusion principles for journals in the RCA.These steps are the underpinning of the RCA’s empirical journal academicevaluation service by which the digital platform addresses the needs of authors toselect reliable journals for submission, readers to select high-quality literature forreading, and editors to track their own journal citation performance. As such, theRCA core journal list will serve as a useful Find-a-Journal tool. Any interestedparty is welcome to use this journal list and recommend it to their peers.
文摘After three rounds of rigorous evaluation of registered scholars conducted by the Reference Citation Analysis(RCA)editorial team of Baishideng Publishing Group(Baishideng),the RCA database of Baishideng officially released the 2022 Article Influence Index(2022 AII)of 632 scholars from 74 countries/territories in 98 research categories,for the first time.The list of 632 scholars can be found at:https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/searchscholar.Among them,the highest 2022 AII is 348.211,the highest number of total citations is 42830,and the highest number of total articles is 901.The category with the largest number of RCA scholars is Gastroenterology&Hepatology,with a total of 100(15.8%),and the second is Surgery,with a total of 46(7.3%).This article summarizes the RCA scholars and describes the mission of RCA,the openness and transparency of RCA evaluation,the calculation method for the 2022 AII,and the evaluation process of RCA scholars.The RCA scholar list will effectively serve as a useful Find-a-Scholar tool.Any interested scholar is welcome to register and join this RCA scholar list.
