Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30429933›Full record

ReviewThe western journal of emergency medicine2018

Measuring Scholarly Productivity: A Primer for Junior Faculty. Part III: Understanding Publication Metrics.

Linda S Murphy, Chadd K Kraus, Shahram Lotfipour, Michael Gottlieb, James R Langabeer, Mark I Langdorf

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Promotion and tenure letters: A guide for faculty.AEM education and training · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article-Level Metrics.Journal of Korean medical science · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Published a research paper? What next??Journal of postgraduate medicine
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Linda S MurphyUniversity of California-Irvine Libraries, Reference Department, Irvine, California.
Chadd K KrausGeisinger Health System, Department of Emergency Medicine, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Shahram LotfipourUniversity of California Irvine Health School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Irvine, California.
Michael GottliebRush University Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
James R LangabeerUniversity of Texas McGovern School of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Mark I LangdorfUniversity of California Irvine Health School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Irvine, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are approximately 78 indexed journals in the specialty of emergency medicine (EM), making it challenging to determine which is the best option for junior faculty. This paper is the final component of a three-part series focused on guiding junior faculty to enhance their scholarly productivity. As an EM junior faculty's research career advances, the bibliometric tools and resources detailed in this paper should be considered when developing a publication submission strategy. The tenure and promotion decision process in many universities relies at least in part on these types of bibliometrics. This paper provides an understanding of new, alternative metrics that can be used to promote scientific progress in a transparent and timely manner.

Indexed as

BibliometricsEmergency MedicineFacultyHumansJournal Impact FactorPublishing

Identifiers

PMID30429933
PMCPMC6225941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.