Author and journal self-citation in Emergency Medicine original research articles

Sri‐Ganeshan, Muhuntha; Walker, Kimberly P.; Lines, Travis; Neal-Williams, Tom; Taylor, David

doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2021.09.005

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A continuous effort might be beneficial for papers' improvement in alternative scores and traditional citations after 12 months, but our pilot project focused the intervention only on a limited six-month time frame. Some studies found that the number of authors correlated with citations and scores (20). We did not find such a correlation between number of authors and any of the endpoints, citations, downloads and Altmetric scores in our sample, including Mendeley readers.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Altmetric score on manuscript citations: A randomized-controlled trial

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Alternative metrics to traditional, citation-based metrics are increasingly being used. These are complementary to traditional metrics, like downloads and citations, and give information on how often a given journal article is discussed and used in professional (reference managers) and social networks, such as mainstream media and Twitter. Altmetrics is used in most journals and is available in all indexed headache medicine journals. Whether Altmetrics have an input on traditional, citation-based metrics or whether it is a stand-alone metric system is not clear. Actively promoting a paper through media channels will probably increase the Altmetric score but the question arises whether this will also increase citations and downloads of this individual paper. Methods Focusing on this point we performed a randomized study in order to test the hypothesis that a promotion intervention would improve citations and other science metric scores. We selected 48 papers published in Cephalalgia from July 2019 to January 2020 and randomized them to either receive an active promotion through social media channels or not. The primary outcome used was the difference between mean article citations with versus without intervention 12 months after the intervention period. Results The results show that the alternative metrics significantly increased for those papers randomly selected to receive an intervention compared to those who did not. This effect was observed in the first 12 months, right after the boosting strategy was performed. The higher promoted paper diffusion in social media lead to a significantly higher number of citations and downloads. Conclusion Further promotion strategies should be studied in order to tailor the best cost-benefit intervention.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 81%

“…Some studies found that the number of authors correlated with citations and scores (20). We did not find such a correlation between number of authors and any of the endpoints, citations, downloads and Altmetric scores in our sample, including Mendeley readers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Altmetric score on manuscript citations: A randomized-controlled trial

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On a complementary note, the ratio of self-citations to preprints in neuroscience-related Scopus documents were investigated using Scite. Author self-citation refers to citing one's own previously published work in an upcoming publication (Sri-Ganeshan et al, 2021). Out of 451 records of the research sample found by Scite, 77 (17.07%) were identified as author self-citations to preprints.…”

Section: Figure 6 the Location Of Citations To Preprints Within The S...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Neuroscience Researchers’ Trust in Preprints through Citation Analysis

Rasuli,

Seyfzadehdarabad,

Cardone

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preprints have emerged as efficient tools for fast and free dissemination of scientific findings. The present study explores the evolving landscape of preprints among the field of neuroscience and examines patterns and evolution of citations to preprints over time in this field. Leveraging bibliometric methods, we identified over 33,000 citations (1993-2022) to preprints within neuroscience publications indexed in Scopus. The findings elucidate a significant temporal increase in the number of documents citing preprints, reaching a peak of around 60 per 1,000 Scopus documents in 2021. Diverse document types, particularly reviews, exhibit a growing reliance on preprints as references. The most frequently cited preprint servers include bioRxiv, ArXiv, medRxiv, and PsyArXiv. Leading journals such as eLife and PLOS Computational Biology have cited preprints more than others. The United States takes the lead in citing preprints, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany. Using Scite.ai, motivations underlying preprint citations and the context in which they were cited were explored and the results are indicative of the mentioning nature of 93% of citations to preprints. Furthermore, the introduction and discussion sections have shown to include the highest number of citations to preprints. The findings highlight the dynamic transformation of preprints in neuroscience field.

show abstract

Journal self-citations trends in sport sciences: an analysis of disciplinary journals from 2013 to 2022

Bennett,

Singh,

Slattery

2024

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports on the yearly rate of journal self-citation (JSC) in sport sciences, how it changes over time, and its association with journal impact factor (JIF). Citations made by all 87 journals in “sport sciences” from 2013 to 2022 were extracted, as was their 2022 JIF. JSC rates were calculated using a Poisson distribution method. A mixed-effects negative binomial regression examined changes in yearly JSC rates over time. The association between average JSC rates and JIF were compared using a negative binomial regression. The median JSC rate was 6.3 self-citations per 100 citations. JSC rates are increasing in sport sciences by ~ 10% per year (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.1, 95% CI 1.1–1.2; trivial effect). There was a significant negative association between JSC rate and JIF (IRR = 0.9, 95% CI 0.9, 1.0; trivial effect). Contrary to observations made in prior literature examining broader disciplines, the increasing JSC rate in sport sciences may be attributed to the growing maturity of this novel discipline. As sport-science topic areas become more established and appear in discipline specific journals, more JSCs may occur due to an increasing body of literature in these journals. The negative association between JSC rate and JIF may be due to specialized and less visible journals having a naturally lower JIF, as their impact is confined to a narrower field.

show abstract

Author and journal self-citation in Emergency Medicine original research articles

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

Effect of Altmetric score on manuscript citations: A randomized-controlled trial

Effect of Altmetric score on manuscript citations: A randomized-controlled trial

Exploring Neuroscience Researchers’ Trust in Preprints through Citation Analysis

Journal self-citations trends in sport sciences: an analysis of disciplinary journals from 2013 to 2022

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About