ArticleScientific reports2013
A proposal for a novel impact factor as an alternative to the JCR impact factor.
Article in Scientific reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bibliometric analysis of global performance and trends of research on combined sewer overflows (CSOs) from 1990 to 2022.Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research · 2024Article
- Bibliometric Indices of Scientific Journals: Time to overcome the obsession and think beyond the Impact Factor.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2017Review
- Ascertaining the standard of journal using quality indices.Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One disadvantage of the JCR impact factor, the most commonly used assessment tool for ranking and evaluating scientific journals, is its inability in distinguishing among different shapes of citation distribution curves, leading to unfair evaluation of journals in some cases. This paper aims to put forward an alternative impact factor (IF') that can properly reflect citation distributions. The two impact factors are linearly and positively correlated, and have roughly the same order of magnitude. Because of the ability of IF' in distinguishing among different shapes of citation distribution curves, IF' may properly reflect the academic performance of a scientific journal in a way that is different from the JCR impact factor with some unique features that reward journals with highly cited papers. Therefore, it is suggested that IF' could be used to complement the JCR impact factor.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.