...

Artículo

Evaluation and Comparison of Academic Impact and Disruptive Innovation Level of Medical Journals: Bibliometric Analysis and Disruptive Evaluation

Resumen

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 (JCC5), 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 (CC5) 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, JCC5, 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 CC5, 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).
Fabiano, Bruno (54790593300); Guastaferro, Mariangela (57221091243); Pettinato, Margherita (56694938500); Pasman, Hans J. (7003939527)
Towards strengthening resilience of organizations by risk management tools: A scientometric perspective on COVID-19 experience in a healthcare and industrial setting
2024
10.1002/cjce.25196
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85184201403&doi=10.1002%2fcjce.25196&partnerID=40&md5=7b1f6c44ed3c8ae243f0140f72ef5e7d
Civil, Chemical and Environmental Engineering Department (DICCA)—Genoa University, Genoa, Italy; TEES Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Center, Texas A&M University System, College Station, TX, United States
All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access
Scopus
Artículo obtenido de:
Scopus
Fuente
0 0 votos
Califica el artículo
Subscribirse
Notificación de
Campus Samborondón
Vía Samborondón Km. 13.5
Call Center: 5150400
metricas@ecotec.edu.ec
Facebook Instagram Youtube

Mapa del sitio

Seraphinite AcceleratorOptimized by Seraphinite Accelerator
Turns on site high speed to be attractive for people and search engines.