ArticleThe journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association2024
Librarian involvement on knowledge synthesis articles and its relationship to article citation count and Journal Impact Factor.
Article in The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Our aim was to determine if there is a relationship between librarian involvement on a knowledge synthesis project and the synthesis's citation count or the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of its publication venue. Methods: A total of 551 knowledge syntheses published during a one-year period (2020) from a single category, "Psychology, Clinical", in Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports were exported from Web of Science along with the citation counts for each synthesis and the JIF of its publication venue. The full-text of each article was examined in order to code each as either co-author, acknowledged, or unknown to reflect the level of librarian involvement in the synthesis. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test on bootstrapped samples was used to determine the significance of the results. Results: Librarians were co-authors or acknowledged in 80 (15%) of the syntheses examined. Analyzing two levels of librarian involvement (involved, unknown) indicated no relationship between the level of librarian involvement and the JIF of the journal nor the citation count the synthesis received since publication. Discussion: There is no evidence of a relationship between librarian involvement in knowledge syntheses and the JIF of the publication or citation count of documents published in journals falling in the JCR category of "Psychology, Clinical" in the year 2020. Repeating this methodology in a different JCR category could help determine whether this lack of a relationship extends beyond the "Psychology, Clinical" category.
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.