Overcitation and overrepresentation of review papers in the most cited papers

Review papers tend to be cited more frequently than regular research articles. This fact, together with the continuous increase of the share of reviews in scientific literature, can have important consequences for the measurement of individuals’ research output, usually based on citation analysis. However, studies evaluating the differences in citations of review papers compared to original research articles are almost non-existing in the literature. This paper presents a thorough analysis of the overcitation and overrepresentation of review papers in the most cited papers of the 35 largest subject categories in Science Citation Index-Expanded. Results indicate the average citations received by reviews depends largely on the research area considered, varying from 1.34 to 6.74 times the citations received by original research articles (average value is 2.95). Correlated with this overcitation, there is an important overrepresentation of reviews in the most cited papers, this overrepresentation being greater when the most highly cited papers are considered, i.e. 0.05% and 0.1% most cited papers, where the share of reviews have increased from 16 to 18% in 1990 to around 40% in 2010. Interestingly, the overcitation and overrepresentation in the most cited papers is more important in the areas with the lowest shares of reviews in total publications.     

中国知网数据库中高被引文献与高下载文献类型分析——以医药卫生科技类文献为例

在中国知网数据库中检索医药卫生类2011年1月1日至2014年8月31日下载与被引频次排位前100名的文章并对其进行分析,发现下载排名前100篇文章中这2类合计占56.7％,被引排名前100篇文章中述评类和规范类合计占55.2％,两者重叠的23篇中,规范类和述评类合计占69.6％.认为规范类和述评类文献具有较高的权威性、参考价值大,是能够产生较高下载和较高被引的文献类型,应是期刊组稿的重要方向之一.观察下载次数与被引次数发现,两者没有明显的相关性,无规律可循.认为单纯以一两个数据库的下载、被引数据来做定量分析是不科学的,仅可作为定性参考之用.在研究的100篇文献中,有4篇为一稿多发,均属于规范类文章.认为这类文章承担着行业指导性任务,传播理应更广泛,故应与一般意义上的一稿多投、一稿多发的学术不端行为相区别.     

Document clustering of scientific texts using citation contexts

Document clustering has many important applications in the area of data mining and information retrieval. Many existing document clustering techniques use the “bag-of-words” model to represent the content of a document. However, this representation is only effective for grouping related documents when these documents share a large proportion of lexically equivalent terms. In other words, instances of synonymy between related documents are ignored, which can reduce the effectiveness of applications using a standard full-text document representation. To address this problem, we present a new approach for clustering scientific documents, based on the utilization of citation contexts. A citation context is essentially the text surrounding the reference markers used to refer to other scientific works. We hypothesize that citation contexts will provide relevant synonymous and related vocabulary which will help increase the effectiveness of the bag-of-words representation. In this paper, we investigate the power of these citation-specific word features, and compare them with the original document’s textual representation in a document clustering task on two collections of labeled scientific journal papers from two distinct domains: High Energy Physics and Genomics. We also compare these text-based clustering techniques with a link-based clustering algorithm which determines the similarity between documents based on the number of co-citations, that is in-links represented by citing documents and out-links represented by cited documents. Our experimental results indicate that the use of citation contexts, when combined with the vocabulary in the full-text of the document, is a promising alternative means of capturing critical topics covered by journal articles. More specifically, this document representation strategy when used by the clustering algorithm investigated in this paper, outperforms both the full-text clustering approach and the link-based clustering technique on both scientific journal datasets.     

Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field

In 2008, the type of document “proceedings paper” (PP) was assigned in the WoS database to journal articles which were initially presented at a conference and later adapted for publication in a journal. Since the use of two different labels (“article” and “proceedings paper”) might lead to infer differences in their relevance and/or quality, this paper presents a comparative study of standard journal articles and PP in journals to explore potential differences between them. The study focuses on the Library and Information Science field in the Web of Science database and covers the 1990–2008 period. PP approximately account for 9% of the total number of articles in this field, two-thirds of which are published in monographic issues devoted to conferences, which tend to be concentrated in specific journals. Proceedings papers emerge as an heterogeneous set comprising PP in ordinary issues, similar to standard articles in structure and impact of research; and PP in monographic issues, which seem to be less comprehensive and tend to receive less citations. Faster publication of PP in monographic than in ordinary issues may conceal differences in the review process undergone by either type of paper. The main implications of these results for authors, bibliometricians, journal editors and research evaluators are pointed out.     

The Maine electronic document delivery project: a cooperative project of Maine hospital libraries and the NN/LM New England Region

The article discusses an Ariel document delivery project with seven Maine hospital libraries, the University of Massachusetts Medical School Library (UMass), and the New England Regional office of the National Network of Libraries of Medicine. Funding was awarded to six network members to purchase equipment or Ariel software. UMass served as a document provider. During the test, libraries received documents from UMass via Ariel or via the Web as a PDF document. This form of document delivery was faster than standard service with better quality of delivered articles. The column describes the project and outlines possible future steps.     

国外文献传递理论研究进展：2000-2008

主要选取Interlending &; Document Supply 2000-2008年间发表的文献传递方面的论文进行归纳分析,以反映国外图书馆文献传递领域近年的理论研究进展。国外过度严格的知识产权与数字版权管理、图书馆经费短缺及全球化服务标准缺位成为文献传递活动主要障碍;信息通信技术、web2.0技术及文献电子化与网络化技术改变文献传递的工作流程、服务平台及文献传递的市场;图书馆与其他信息机构的合作将成为图书馆文献传递服务的新模式和新内容,文献传递工作人员的职责也将随之发生变化。     

Consistency and accuracy of indexing systematic review articles and meta‐analyses in medline

Background: Systematic review articles support the advance of science and translation of research evidence into healthcare practice. Inaccurate retrieval from medline could limit access to reviews. Objective: To determine the quality of indexing systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in medline . Methods: The Clinical Hedges Database, containing the results of a hand search of 161 journals, was used to test medline indexing terms for their ability to retrieve systematic reviews that met predefined methodologic criteria (labelled as ‘pass’ review articles) and reviews that reported a meta‐analysis. Results: The Clinical Hedges Database contained 49 028 articles; 753 were ‘pass’ review articles (552 with a meta‐analysis). In total 758 review articles (independent of whether they passed) reported a meta‐analysis. The search strategy that retrieved the highest number of ‘pass’ systematic reviews achieved a sensitivity of 97.1%. The publication type ‘meta analysis’ had a false positive rate of 5.6% (95% CI 3.9 to 7.6), and false negative rate of 0.31% (95% CI 0.26 to 0.36) for retrieving systematic reviews that reported a meta‐analysis. Conclusions: Inaccuracies in indexing systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in medline can be partly overcome by a 5‐term search strategy. Introducing a publication type for systematic reviews of the literature could improve retrieval performance.     

Clinical Evidence diagnosis: Developing a sensitive search strategy to retrieve diagnostic studies on deep vein thrombosis: a pragmatic approach

Objectives: To devise and evaluate a sensitive search strategy to retrieve diagnostic studies on specific diagnostic tests for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Methods: Systematic reviews on diagnostic tests for DVT were identified and the studies cited by them used to produce a reference set of search results (to be used to evaluate different search strategies). Five existing diagnosis search filters were combined to produce a sensitive search. This combined search was then refined to produce a more specific strategy, which was run on medline and the results were checked against the reference set. This search was too specific and was modified to produce a more balanced final strategy, which was again tested and the results compared with the reference set. The sensitivity of this newly created strategy was compared with the existing diagnosis searches already found. Finally, studies identified by the final search strategy were critically appraised for validity and relevance and the selected articles were compared with those found in the reference set. Results: The final filter retrieved 124 out of 126 references from the reference set. From the search result, 227 cohort studies were selected and 147 of these were not cited in any of the systematic reviews on diagnostic tests for DVT. Conclusions: The search strategy had 98.8% sensitivity. The precision of 8.8%, although low, compares well with other strategies with high sensitivity. Most of the systematic reviews on diagnosing a DVT have omitted a number of high quality articles.     

Network assembly of scientific communities of varying size and specificity

How does the collaboration network of researchers coalesce around a scientific topic? What sort of social restructuring occurs as a new field develops? Previous empirical explorations of these questions have examined the evolution of co-authorship networks associated with several fields of science, each noting a characteristic shift in network structure as fields develop. Historically, however, such studies have tended to rely on manually annotated datasets and therefore only consider a handful of disciplines, calling into question the universality of the observed structural signature. To overcome this limitation and test the robustness of this phenomenon, we use a comprehensive dataset of over 189,000 scientific articles and develop a framework for partitioning articles and their authors into coherent, semantically related groups representing scientific fields of varying size and specificity. We then use the resulting population of fields to study the structure of evolving co-authorship networks. Consistent with earlier findings, we observe a global topological transition as the co-authorship networks coalesce from a disjointed aggregate into a dense giant connected component that dominates the network. We validate these results using a separate, complimentary corpus of scientific articles, and, overall, we find that the previously reported characteristic structural evolution of a scientific field's associated co-authorship network is robust across a large number of scientific fields of varying size, scope, and specificity. Additionally, the framework developed in this study may be used in other scientometric contexts in order to extend studies to compare across a larger range of scientific disciplines.     

Planning that title: Practices and preferences for titles with colons in academic articles

Colons play a hidden but important role in the planning and writing of effective titles for academic articles. This paper presents three studies of current practices in using colons and four studies of students' and academics' preferences for titles with and without colons. The practice studies showed disciplinary differences in the use of colons (with a greater use in the arts than in the sciences). They also showed that more single authors than multiple authors use colons. Using colons in the titles of academic articles had no effect upon their subsequent citation rates. The preference studies showed that students and academics generally preferred titles with colons to titles without them. However, these results depended to some extent on the materials and the methods used.     

Assessing the roles and challenges of librarians in dental systematic and scoping reviews

Objective:The objective of this study was to determine the scope of experience, roles, and challenges that librarians face in participating in dental and oral health systematic and scoping reviews to inform outreach efforts to researchers and identify areas for librarian professional development.Methods:The authors developed a twenty-three-item survey based on the findings of two recent articles about health sciences librarians'' roles and challenges in conducting systematic and scoping reviews. The survey was distributed via electronic mailing lists to librarians who were likely to have participated in conducting dental systematic and scoping reviews.Results:While survey respondents reported participating in many dental reviews, they participated more commonly in systematic reviews than in scoping reviews. Also, they worked less commonly on dental and oral health reviews than on non-dental reviews. Librarian roles in dental reviews tended to follow traditional librarian roles: all respondents had participated in planning and information retrieval stages, whereas fewer respondents had participated in screening and assessing articles. The most frequently reported challenges involved the lead reviewer or review team rather than the librarians themselves, with time- and methodology-related challenges being most common.Conclusions:Although librarians might not be highly involved in dental and oral health systematic and scoping reviews, more librarian participation in these reviews, either as methodologists or information experts, may improve their reviews'' overall quality.     

Analyzing linguistic complexity and scientific impact

The number of publications and the number of citations received have become the most common indicators of scholarly success. In this context, scientific writing increasingly plays an important role in scholars’ scientific careers. To understand the relationship between scientific writing and scientific impact, this paper selected 12 variables of linguistic complexity as a proxy for depicting scientific writing. We then analyzed these features from 36,400 full-text Biology articles and 1,797 full-text Psychology articles. These features were compared to the scientific impact of articles, grouped into high, medium, and low categories. The results suggested no practical significant relationship between linguistic complexity and citation strata in either discipline. This suggests that textual complexity plays little role in scientific impact in our data sets.     

A Comparative Citation Analysis of Seven Mid-South Law Reviews

Abstract

Several studies have compared the frequency of citation to law reviews, comparing citation rates for all or most law reviews being published at the time of the study. This article compares the citation rates of general law reviews published by seven public law schools in close geographic proximity. The results show that citation rates are influenced by several factors, including whether articles published by the journals have a state or national focus, the subject matter of the articles, and whether articles are published as part of symposia.     

国外撤销论文研究综述

以国外撤销论文的相关研究为基础,从定性与定量研究、医学与非医学数据库研究、撤销原因、撤销论文的引用情况等几个方面对前人研究成果进行梳理总结,概述撤销论文的研究现状,以期对我国科研管理、期刊管理、科研评价以及遏制学术不端行为等方面政策的制订提供参考。     

The Importance of Length Normalization for XML Retrieval

XML retrieval is a departure from standard document retrieval in which each individual XML element, ranging from italicized words or phrases to full blown articles, is a retrievable unit. The distribution of XML element lengths is unlike what we usually observe in standard document collections, prompting us to revisit the issue of document length normalization. We perform a comparative analysis of arbitrary elements versus relevant elements, and show the importance of element length as a parameter for XML retrieval. Within the language modeling framework, we investigate a range of techniques that deal with length either directly or indirectly. We observe a length-bias introduced by the amount of smoothing, and show the importance of extreme length bias for XML retrieval. We also show that simply removing shorter elements from the index (by introducing a cut-off value) does not create an appropriate element length normalization. Even after restricting the minimal size of XML elements occurring in the index, the importance of an extreme explicit length bias remains.     

莫里循文库给公共图书馆地方文献工作的启示

通过对莫里循生平的简单回顾，以及莫里循文库的形成和特点的分析，认为莫里循文库对今天公共图书馆地方文献工作的很多侧面，如地方文献的收藏范围、地方文献的收集标准及地方文献的整理利用等多方面带来启发和思考。     

Article’s scientific prestige: Measuring the impact of individual articles in the web of science

We performed a citation analysis on the Web of Science publications consisting of more than 63 million articles and over a billion citations on 254 subjects from 1981 to 2020. We proposed the Article’s Scientific Prestige (ASP) metric and compared this metric to number of citations (#Cit) and journal grade in measuring the scientific impact of individual articles in the large-scale hierarchical and multi-disciplined citation network. In contrast to #Cit, ASP, that is computed based on the eigenvector centrality, considers both direct and indirect citations, and provides steady-state evaluation cross different disciplines. We found that ASP and #Cit are not aligned for most articles, with a growing mismatch amongst the less cited articles. While both metrics are reliable for evaluating the prestige of articles such as Nobel Prize winning articles, ASP tends to provide more persuasive rankings than #Cit when the articles are not highly cited. The journal grade, that is eventually determined by a few highly cited articles, is unable to properly reflect the scientific impact of individual articles. The number of references and coauthors are less relevant to scientific impact, but subjects do make a difference.     

An assessment of the accessibility of PDF versions of selected journal articles published in a WCAG 2.0 era (2014–2018)

Two hundred portable document format (PDF) articles from four Web of Science‐indexed disability‐related journals were analysed to assess their accessibility. Fifty articles from each journal published between 2014 and 2018 were examined using expert manual inspection, Adobe Acrobat Pro XI, PDF Accessibility Checker 3 and NVDA screen reader. Results show that only 15.5% of the documents were tagged, only 10.5% had alternative text for images, 74.5% had bookmarks to facilitate navigation, and 87% had meaningful titles in their title fields. However, image alternative texts were meaningless, and title fields were not displayed when the document was open. However, all the documents had accessibility permissions enabled; hence, they could be read with Adobe Acrobat Pro XI Read Out Loud feature and NVDA screen reader. All the articles had an alternative HTML version of their full text in the same location on their website as the PDF versions. The inconsistency with which each PDF was produced suggests the need for an improvement in the workflow process to improve accessibility.     

Agenda Building In Media Coverage of Food Research

Concern has been raised about the rising influence of public relations on scientific news coverage and the potential role of institutional sources in shaping news reports. This study uses quantitative content analysis and qualitative interviews to explore the influence of public relations activities on newspaper coverage of “superfoods” and, in particular, to explore the transparency of reporting of the sources of research funding. Superfoods were chosen as a case study because the term is applied to a wide range of foods with potential health benefits (e.g. foods high in antioxidants). Furthermore, foods labelled as “superfoods” have seen sharp increases in sales, suggesting a potential commercial incentive for such labelling. Analysis of a sample of news articles reporting superfoods revealed a considerable influence for media releases in shaping the content of reports, while less than a third of reports discussing research studies funded by organisations with a commercial interest in the findings mentioned the funding sources. Qualitative interviews confirmed the role of press offices in promoting research, particularly from scientific conferences, and suggest that scientific societies are applying less stringent criteria to studies selected for publication than in the past.