ArticleHealthcare informatics research2017
Citation Analysis for Biomedical and Health Sciences Journals Published in Korea.
Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global research trends and influential contributions in sickle cell disease: a bibliometric analysis of the top 100 cited papers.Journal of community genetics · 2026Review
- Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research: A Bibliometric Analysis over a 50-Year Period.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Disparity in biomedical publication trends in the CARICOM countries: Is there a need for a more vibrant research culture in the region?SAGE open medicine · 2020Article
- Researcher and Author Impact Metrics: Variety, Value, and Context.Journal of Korean medical science · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesA citation analysis of biomedical and health sciences journals was conducted based on their enlistment in journal databases to identify the factors contributing to the citation metrics.
methodsAmong the 1,219 academic journals managed by the National Center for Medical Information and Knowledge at the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 556 journals were included for analysis as of July 2016. The characteristics of the journals include history years, publication media, language, open-access policy as well as the status enlisted in international and domestic databases, such as Science Citation Index (SCI), Scopus, Medline, PubMed Central, Embase, and Korea Citation Index (KCI). Six bibliometric measures were collected from SCI, Scopus, and KCI as of 2015, the most recent disclosure year. Analyses of group differences and influential factors were conducted using
resultsJournal characteristics, such as history years, publication media, and open-access policy, were not significant factors influencing global or domestical citation of the journals. However, global citations were higher for SCI and Medline enlisted journals than for their counterparts. Among KCI journals, the KCI impact factors of journals published in English only were lower.
conclusionsEfforts by journals to be enlisted in international databases, especially in SCI and Medline, are critical to enhance their global circulation. However, articles published in English only hinder the use of domestic researchers. Different strategies are required for enhancing international and domestic readerships.
Indexed as
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.