Algunas consideraciones sobre el valor intrínseco del factor de impacto de las revistas científicas

Se analiza el porqué de las citaciones de los artículos. Se realizan también algunas consideraciones sobre el factor de impacto de las revistas, sus ventajas y sus posibles defectos. El factor de impacto de las revistas, desde su popularización por el Institute for Scientific Information, ha tomado una gran importancia como parámetro objetivo de evaluación de las revistas científicas y, por extensión, de todo lo que las rodea. No hay correlación con el desfase en factores de impacto de algunas revistas anglosajonas y el de las revistas escritas en otros idiomas. Probablemente se benefician de publicar en inglés y del llamado “efecto Mateo”, según el cual los investigadores científicos eminentes cosechan aplausos mucho más nutridos que otros investigadores, menos conocidos, por contribuciones equivalentes. Es paradójico también que los grandes descubrimientos de nuestra época no figuren entre los 100 artículos más citados. No hay tampoco una correlación entre todos los artículos aparecidos en una publicación y su factor de impacto; la mitad de los artículos de una revista son citados diez veces más que la otra mitad. Los artículos citados 0 veces reciben el mérito de los mejores. Lo ortodoxo sería utilizar en cada artículo el número de citas que recibe, que sería su propio factor de impacto y, para los autores, el índice H.

Evidence-based editing: factors influencing the number of citations in a national journal

Purpose: Citations received by papers published within a journal serve to increase its bibliometric impact. The objective of this paper was to assess the influence of publication language, article type, number of authors, and year of publication on the citations received by papers published in Gaceta Sanitaria, a Spanish-language journal of public health. Methods: The information sources were the journal website and the Web of Knowledge, of the Institute of Scientific Information. The period analyzed was from 2007 to 2010. We included original articles, brief original articles, and reviews published within that period. We extracted manually information regarding the variables analyzed and we also differentiated among total citations and self-citations. We constructed logistic regression models to analyze the probability of a Gaceta Sanitaria paper to be cited or not, taking into account the aforementioned independent variables. We also analyzed the probability of receiving citations from non-Spanish authors. Results: Two hundred forty papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The included papers received a total of 287 citations, which became 202 when excluding self-citations. The only variable influencing the probability of being cited was the publication year. After excluding never cited papers, time since publication and review papers had the highest probabilities of being cited. Papers in English and review articles had a higher probability of citation from non-Spanish authors. Conclusions: Publication language has no influence on the citations received by a national, non-English journal. Reviews in English have the highest probability of citation from abroad. Editors should decide how to manage this information when deciding policies to raise the bibliometric impact factor of their journals.

Does the scientific evidence support the advertising claims made for products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis? A systematic review

Background To analyse the scientific evidence that exists for the advertising claims made for two products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis and to conduct a comparison between the published literature and what is presented in the corporate website. Methods Systematic review, using Medline through Pubmed and Embase. We included human clinical trials that exclusively measured the effect of Lactobacillus casei or Bifidobacterium lactis on a healthy population, and where the objective was related to the health claims made for certain products in advertising. We assessed the levels of evidence and the strength of the recommendation according to the classification criteria established by the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM). We also assessed the outcomes of the studies published on the website that did not appear in the search. Results Of the 440 articles identified, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Only four (25%) of these presented a level of evidence of 1b and a recommendation grade of A, all corresponding to studies on product containing Bifidobacterium lactis, and only 12 of the 16 studies were published on the corporate website (47). Conclusions There is insufficient scientific evidence to support the health claims made for these products, especially in the case of product containing Lactobacillus casei.

The intellectual structure of research in hospitality management: A literature review using bibliometric methods of the journal International Journal of Hospitality Management

The purpose of this study is to analyze the existing literature on hospitality management from all the research papers published in The International Journal of Hospitality Management (IJHM) between 2008 and 2014. The authors apply bibliometric methods – in particular, author citation and co-citation analyses (ACA) – to identify the main research lines within this scientific field; in other words, its ‘intellectual structure’. Social network analysis (SNA) is also used to perform a visualization of this structure. The results of the analysis allow us to define the different research lines or fronts which shape the intellectual structure of research on hospitality management.