Author Self-Citation in the General Medicine Literature

Abstract

BackgroundAuthor self-citation contributes to the overall citation count of an article and the impact factor of the journal in which it appears. Little is known, however, about the extent of self-citation in the general clinical medicine literature. The objective of this study was to determine the extent and temporal pattern of author self-citation and the article characteristics associated with author self-citation.Methodology/Principal FindingsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of articles published in three high impact general medical journals (JAMA, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine) between October 1, 1999 and March 31, 2000. We retrieved the number and percentage of author self-citations received by the article since publication, as of June 2008, from the Scopus citation database. Several article characteristics were extracted by two blinded, independent reviewers for each article in the cohort and analyzed in multivariable linear regression analyses. Since publication, author self-citations accounted for 6.5% (95% confidence interval 6.3–6.7%) of all citations received by the 328 articles in our sample. Self-citation peaked in 2002, declining annually thereafter. Studies with more authors, in cardiovascular medicine or infectious disease, and with smaller sample size were associated with more author self-citations and higher percentage of author self-citation (all p≤0.01).Conclusions/SignificanceApproximately 1 in 15 citations of articles in high-profile general medicine journals are author self-citations. Self-citation peaks within about 2 years of publication and disproportionately affects impact factor. Studies most vulnerable to this effect are those with more authors, small sample size, and in cardiovascular medicine or infectious disease.

Top 100 Most Influential Articles in the Field of Myeloid Neoplasms: A Bibliometric Study

“…Secondly, 8% of the total citations were actually author self-citations. This is higher than the average self-citation percentage (i.e., 6.5%) in general medicine [26]. This is an indication that journal citations maybe skewed owing to author self-citations or a large number of people questioning badly researched findings.…”

The prevalence of synchronous self-citation practices at the institutional level

“…It may be noted that where excessive self-citations are regarded as an abuse (Lawani 1982;Martyn 1975), their prevalence in fair number is perceived as normal (Aksnes 2003) and even commendable, if only to avoid the repetition of already published information (Macdonald and Kam 2011). Authors have mostly studied self-citations in specific subject fields, such as Plant Physiology and Neurobiology (Tagliacozzo 1977); Library and Information Science (Dimitroff and Arlitsch 1995;Shah, Gul and Gaur 2015); Ecology (Pichappan and Sarasvady 2002); Diabetes Mellitus (Gami et al 2004); General Medicine (Kulkarni et al 2011); Otolaryngology (Tolisano, Song and Cable 2015), and have mostly examined self-citations with regard to their frequency in an article (the number of times they occur in an article).…”

How the factoid of wind turbines causing ‘vibroacoustic disease’ came to be ‘irrefutably demonstrated’

“…Average diachronous self-citation rates across disciplines have found rates of around 7-35%. 38,40,47 Self-citation can be useful as it allows research groups to contextualise their earlier investigations and highlight previous findings. 48 However, self-citation can also be used to artificially increase the apparent scientific impact of a researcher's work and has been shown to increase an author's H-index by 12-24%.…”

“…We used Scopus in this analysis, as it has previously been shown to have the greatest accuracy and retrieve the most citations. 40 An advanced Google search using the string 'vibroacoustic' and 'disease' and 'wind' was conducted on 10 different computers on 28 August 2012 with the average number of hits calculated. Running the search across different computers owned by different people is important because Google search results can vary according one's search history.…”