Citation Analysis of Hepatitis Monthly by Journal Citation Report (ISI), Google Scholar, and Scopus

Author(s):
Seyyed Mohammad MiriSeyyed Mohammad Miri2, Azam RaoofiAzam Raoofi2,*, Zahra HeidariZahra Heidari3
2Kowsar, [email protected], The Netherlands
3Department of Clinical Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science and Health Services, IR Iran

Hepatitis Monthly:Vol. 12, issue 9; 7441
Published online:Sep 30, 2012
Article type:Brief Report
Received:Jan 25, 2012
Accepted:Jul 28, 2012
How to Cite:Miri SM, Raoofi A, Heidari Z. Citation Analysis of Hepatitis Monthly by Journal Citation Report (ISI), Google Scholar, and Scopus. Hepat Mon. 2012;12(9):7441. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/hepatmon.7441

Abstract

Background:

Citation analysis as one of the most widely used methods of bibliometrics can be used for computing the various impact measures for scholars based on data from citation databases. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) from Thomson Reuters provides annual report in the form of impact factor (IF) for each journal.

Objectives:

We aimed to evaluate the citation parameters of Hepatitis Monthly by JCR in 2010 and compare them with GS and Sc.

Materials and Methods:

All articles of Hepat Mon published in 2009 and 2008 which had been cited in 2010 in three databases including WoS, Sc and GS gathered in a spreadsheet. The IFs were manually calculated.

Results:

Among the 104 total published articles the accuracy rates of GS and Sc in recording the total number of articles was 96% and 87.5%. There was a difference between IFs among the three databases (0.793 in ISI [Institute for Scientific Information], 0.945 in Sc and 0.85 GS). The missing rate of citations in ISI was 4% totally. Original articles were the main cited types, whereas, guidelines and clinical challenges were the least ones.

Conclusions:

None of the three databases succeed to record all articles published in the journal. Despite high sensitivity of GS comparing to Sc, it cannot be a reliable source for indexing since GS has lack of screening in the data collection and low specificity. Using an average of three IFs is suggested to find the correct IF. Editors should be more aware on the role of original articles in increasing IF and the potential efficacy of review articles in long term impact factor.

Full Text

Full text is available in PDF

Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Ordering Reprints

Articles are published under the Creative Commons license stated on each article. No permission or royalty fee is required for uses permitted by that license. CCC handles optional bulk and customized reprint orders. Any quotation covers production and delivery services only, not copyright permission. > Request Reprints from CCC 

Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles