Self-citation policies and journal self-citation rate among Critical Care Medicine journals

Abstract

Background Inappropriate authors’ self-citation (A-SC) is a growing mal-practice possibly boosted by the raising importance given to author’s metrics. Similarly, also excessive journals’ self-citation (J-SC) practice may factitiously influence journal’s metrics (impact factor, IF). Evaluating the appropriateness of each self-citation remains challenging. Main body We evaluated the presence of policies discouraging A-SC in Critical Care Medicine (CCM) journals with IF. We also calculated the J-SC rate of these journals. In order to evaluate if J-SC rates are influenced by the focus of interest of CCM journals, we separated them in three sub-categories (“multidisciplinary”, “broad” or “topic-specific” CCM journals). We analyzed 35 CCM journals and only 5 (14.3%) discouraged excessive and inappropriate A-SC. The median IF was higher in CCM journals with A-SC policies [4.1 (3–12)] as compared to those without [2.5 (2–3.5); p = 0.02]. The J-SC rate was highly variable (0–35.4%), and not influenced by the presence of A-SC policies (p = 0.32). However, J-SC rate was different according to the focus of interest (p = 0.01): in particular, it was higher in “topic-specific” CCM journals [15.3 (8.8–23.3%)], followed by “broad” CCM [11.8 (4.8–17.9%)] and “multidisciplinary” journals [6.1 (3.6–9.1%)]. Conclusions A limited number of CCM journals have policies for limiting A-SC, and these have higher IF. The J-SC rate among CCM journals is highly variable and higher in “topic-specific” interest CCM journals. Excluding self-referencing practice from scientific metrics calculation could be valuable to tackle this scientific malpractice.

The influence of policies limiting author self-citations on journals impact factor and self-citation rate in respiratory system

“…In this study, we found that Respiratory System journals had a low prevalence of A-SCs policies (~14%). This prevalence is identical to Anesthesiology journals [4] but lower than in Critical Care Medicine [5] and General Surgery [6] journals (22% and 25%, respectively), as shown in previously conducted analyses on A-SCs and J-SC rates in other medical categories.…”

“…The other side of self-citation malpractice is represented by J-SC, which may hinder the attempt to increase the journal IF. The J-SC rate was highly variable in Respiratory System journals, similarly to Anesthesiology (1-37%), Critical Care Medicine (0-35%) and General Surgery (0-31%) journals [4][5][6]. When comparing groups, we could not find a significant influence of A-SC policies on IF and J-SC rates.…”

Retracted systematic reviews continued to be frequently cited: a citation analysis

“…A possible reason for our results could also be self-citation by authors and journals. To self-promote and increase the impact factor, some journal may have a high self-citation rate [33], especially among journals with low impact factors [34]. Some authors may take the initiative to cite studies published in the same journal to improve the chance of being accepted, and retracted articles may be cited by mistake.…”

Author Self-Citation in the Turkish Otorhinolaryngology Literature

“…However, self-citations can also be manipulated by the researchers to affect their influence and recognization. Due to the potential role of author self-citations in citation manipulation, the accurate utilization of self-citations has become an ethical concern and there is ongoing effort to better delineate the self-citation-based ethical misconducts in the academic era ( 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ).…”