ArticleBeyoglu eye journal2024
Assessing the H-Indexes of Editorial Board Members in Ophthalmology Journals Published in Türkiye.
Article in Beyoglu eye journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objectives: The focus of this study was to assess and compare the h-indexes of editorial board members from eight ophthalmology journals in Türkiye and explore the potential correlations between these indexes and the sub-specialties of board members. Methods: Conducted in December 2023, this cross-sectional study utilized publicly available data from Google Scholar (GS), Web of Science, and Scopus. The h-index and number of publications by editorial board members from eight Turkish ophthalmology journals were analyzed. Statistical analysis for this study involved the use of SPSS, employing descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance, and Results: Of the 415 editorial board members, 26 were not ophthalmologists and 12 worked abroad; the credentials of 10 could not be verified. A total of 367 authors were evaluated, revealing significant differences in publication numbers and h-indices among the different subspecialties. Notably, the retinal specialists demonstrated higher productivity. Variability in citation counts was observed across databases, with GS having the widest range. Differences were also noted in the publication and h-index among the editorial boards of different journals. Conclusion: The h-index and number of publications effectively reflected the active status of ophthalmology authors. This study contributes valuable information regarding Turkish ophthalmology journals and their editorial boards, serving as an inspiration for young ophthalmologists. These findings underscore the diverse successes of ophthalmologists across subspecialties, encouraging the exploration of less-explored areas in academic pursuits.
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.