IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v80y2009i3d10.1007_s11192-008-2108-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the influence of clinical trials citations on several bibliometric indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio García Romero

    (Agencia Laín Entralgo. Consejería de Sanidad (Comunidad de Madrid))

  • José Navarrete Cortés

    (Universidad de Jaén)

  • Cristina Escudero

    (Hospital Puerta de Hierro)

  • Juan Antonio Fernández López

    (Universidad de Jaén)

  • Juan Antonio Chaichío Moreno

    (Universidad de Almería)

Abstract

The practice of publishing clinical trials in scientific journals is common, although not without its critics. This study aims to measure the effect of clinical trials citations on several bibliometric indicators: citations per document (CD); journal impact factor (JIF); relative h-index (RhI) and strike rate index (SRI). We select all the citable documents published in the NEJM, Lancet, JAMA, AIM and BMJ, for the period 2000-2004, and record the citations received by those papers from 2000 to 2005. Our results show that clinical trials have a CD significantly higher than those for conventional papers; JIF is lower when clinical trials are excluded, especially for NEJM, Lancet and JAMA. Finally, both RhI and SRI seem to be unaffected by clinical trials citations.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio García Romero & José Navarrete Cortés & Cristina Escudero & Juan Antonio Fernández López & Juan Antonio Chaichío Moreno, 2009. "Measuring the influence of clinical trials citations on several bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 747-760, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:80:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-008-2108-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-2108-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-008-2108-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-008-2108-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Miguel Campanario & Lidia González & Cristina Rodríguez, 2006. "Structure of the impact factor of academic journals in the field of Education and Educational Psychology: Citations from editorial board members," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 37-56, October.
    2. Guang Yu & Liang Wang, 2007. "The self-cited rate of scientific journals and the manipulation of their impact factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 73(3), pages 321-330, December.
    3. Richard Smith & Ian Roberts, 2006. "Patient Safety Requires a New Way to Publish Clinical Trials," PLOS Clinical Trials, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(1), pages 1-3, May.
    4. Tibor Braun & Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert, 2006. "A Hirsch-type index for journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 169-173, October.
    5. Grant Lewison, 2002. "From biomedical research to health improvement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(2), pages 179-192, June.
    6. Juan Miguel Campanario & Lidia González, 2006. "Journal self-citations that contribute to the impact factor: Documents labeled “editorial material” in journals covered by the Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(2), pages 365-386, November.
    7. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Ronald N. Kostoff, 2007. "The difference between highly and poorly cited medical articles in the journal Lancet," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 513-520, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Massimo Arnone & Alberto Costantiello & Angelo Leogrande & Syed Kafait Hussain Naqvi & Cosimo Magazzino, 2024. "Financial Stability and Innovation: The Role of Non-Performing Loans," FinTech, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-41, October.
    2. Iman Tahamtan & Askar Safipour Afshar & Khadijeh Ahamdzadeh, 2016. "Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1195-1225, June.
    3. Paul Donner, 2017. "Document type assignment accuracy in the journal citation index data of Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 219-236, October.
    4. Antonio García-Romero & José Manuel Estrada-Lorenzo, 2014. "A bibliometric analysis of plagiarism and self-plagiarism through Déjà vu," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 381-396, October.
    5. María Bordons & Borja González-Albo & Javier Aparicio & Luz Moreno, 2015. "The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1385-1400, February.
    6. María Bordons & Javier Aparicio & Rodrigo Costas, 2013. "Heterogeneity of collaboration and its relationship with research impact in a biomedical field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 443-466, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonia Andrade & Raúl González-Jonte & Juan Miguel Campanario, 2009. "Journals that increase their impact factor at least fourfold in a few years: The role of journal self-citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(2), pages 515-528, August.
    2. Juan Miguel Campanario & Jesús Carretero & Vera Marangon & Antonio Molina & Germán Ros, 2011. "Effect on the journal impact factor of the number and document type of citing records: a wide-scale study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(1), pages 75-84, April.
    3. Chun-Yang Yin & Mohd Jindra Aris & Xi Chen, 2010. "Combination of Eigenfactor TM and h-index to evaluate scientific journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 639-648, September.
    4. Rabishankar Giri & Sabuj Kumar Chaudhuri, 2021. "Ranking journals through the lens of active visibility," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2189-2208, March.
    5. Goodall, Amanda H., 2009. "Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1079-1092, September.
    6. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Boschma, Ron, 2022. "Do scientific capabilities in specific domains matter for technological diversification in European regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    7. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    8. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    9. Alexander Cordes & Ulrich Schasse, 2015. "The firm's evaluation of local research institutes and universities - an empirical analysis for Germany," ERSA conference papers ersa15p933, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Isaksson, Olov H.D. & Simeth, Markus & Seifert, Ralf W., 2016. "Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain: Evidence from the high tech sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 699-706.
    11. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Rachel Levy & Pascale Roux & Sandrine Wolff, 2009. "An analysis of science–industry collaborative patterns in a large European University," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23, February.
    13. Michele O’Dwyer & Raffaele Filieri & Lisa O’Malley, 2023. "Establishing successful university–industry collaborations: barriers and enablers deconstructed," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 900-931, June.
    14. Kodama, Fumio & Suzuki, Jun, 2007. "How Japanese Companies have used Scientific Advances to Restructure their Businesses: The Receiver-Active National System of Innovation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 976-990, June.
    15. Mohammadi, Ali & Broström, Anders & Franzoni, Chiara, 2015. "Work Force Composition and Innovation: How Diversity in Employees’ Ethnical and Disciplinary Backgrounds Facilitates Knowledge Re-combination," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 413, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    16. Toole, Andrew A. & King, John L., 2011. "Industry-science connections in agriculture: Do public science collaborations and knowledge flows contribute to firm-level agricultural research productivity?," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-064, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2013. "Endogeneous matching in university-industry collaboration: Theory and empirical evidence from the UK," Economics Working Papers 1379, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain, 2003. "The anchor tenant hypothesis: exploring the role of large, local, R&D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1227-1253, November.
    19. Feng Li & Yong Yi & Xiaolong Guo & Wei Qi, 2012. "Performance evaluation of research universities in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan: based on a two-dimensional approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 531-542, February.
    20. Ricardo Moutinho & Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira & Arnaldo Coelho & José Pires Manso, 2016. "Determinants of knowledge-based entrepreneurship: an exploratory approach," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 171-197, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:80:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-008-2108-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.