Artículos

Aim:nUnderstanding the factors that influence the probability of endocrinology thesis publication can guide aspiring researchers in their academic pursuits. This study aimed to assess the publication rate of endocrinology theses and identify the factors that affect thesis publication. Methods: Endocrinology theses between January 1980 and April 2023 were assessed. The publication rates of theses and those published in journals indexed in SCIE and Scopus were examined. The thesis topics, study design, institution, index of the journal, author’s number of first-author publications, H-index, and number of publications by thesis advisors were analyzed to determine their impact on the likelihood of publication. Results: Out of 277 theses, 142 (51.3%) of them had been published in international or national journals. One hundred seventeen (42.2%) were published in SCIE/Scopus indexed journals. A relationship was found between the thesis having a publication and that being conducted in a training and research hospital, a higher number of first-author publications, and a more recent year of the thesis. The H-index of thesis advisors for theses published in SCIE/Scopus-indexed journals was significantly higher (p=0.029). Conclusion: The rate of publication in international peer-reviewed journals for endocrinology theses was higher than the national average. However, there are still many theses waiting to be published. Enhancing the publication rate of endocrinology theses requires a systematic approach that addresses the identified factors affecting publication probability.

Introduction: There is a need to examine the use of artificial intelligence in the branch of nursing and to investigate the characteristics of the research conducted in this field. Aim: The aimed was to examine the characteristics of the current knowledge structure and development process in the field of the use of artificial intelligence in nursing. Method: In the descriptive and evaluative bibliometric analysis study, data were obtained from Web of Science database. All relevant studies conducted between 2004 and 2023 were included in the study. Data analysis was performed using R Biblioshniy software. Two hundred seventy-three studies were included in the study. Results: The most publications (n = 86, 31.50%) were made in this field in 2022. The most productive author in the field of nursing and artificial intelligence was Topaz, Maxim. The prominent topics in the studies were “virtual reality, artificial intelligence, nursing, machine learning, simulation, nursing education, education, pain, nursing students, natural language processing, nurses, robotics, deep learning and mental health”. Conclusion: There has been a significant increase in the number of studies on the use of artificial intelligence in nursing and this area offers an active field of study for nursing researchers

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).