Impact factor evolution of nursing research journals: 2009 to 2014
| Autor: | Jorge Guerrero-Martín, Macarena C. Cáceres, Maria Ángeles Carreto-Lemus, Noelia Durán-Gómez, Demetrio Pérez-Civantos, Borja González-Morales |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2017 |
| Předmět: |
Medical education
030504 nursing Impact factor business.industry Nursing research media_common.quotation_subject 05 social sciences MEDLINE Scopus Context (language use) Subject (documents) CINAHL 03 medical and health sciences Medicine Quality (business) 0509 other social sciences 050904 information & library sciences 0305 other medical science business General Nursing media_common |
| Zdroj: | Nursing Outlook. 65:562-571 |
| ISSN: | 0029-6554 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.outlook.2016.12.010 |
| Popis: | Background The use of bibliometric indicators (impact factor [IF], impact index, h-index, etc.) is now believed to be a fundamental measure of the quality of scientific research output. In this context, the presence of scientific nursing journals in international databases and the factors influencing their impact ratings is being widely analyzed. Purpose The aim of this study was to analyze the presence of scientific nursing journals in international databases and track the changes in their IF. Methods A secondary analysis was carried out on data for the years 2009 to 2014 held in the JCR database (subject category: nursing). Additionally, the presence of scientific nursing journals in Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and SJR was analyzed. Discussion During the period studied, the number of journals indexed in the JCR under the nursing subject category increased from 70 in 2009 (mean IF: 0.99, standard deviation: 0.53) to 115 in 2014 (mean IF: 1.04, standard deviation: 0.42), of which only 70 were listed for the full six years. Although mean IF showed an upward trend throughout this time, no statistically significant differences were found in the variations to this figure. Conclusion Although IF and other bibliometric indicators have their limitations, it is nonetheless true that bibliometry is now the most widely used tool for evaluating scientific output in all disciplines, including nursing, highlighting the importance of being familiar with how they are calculated and their significance when deciding the journal or journals in which to publish the results of our research. That said, it is also necessary to consider other possible alternative ways of assessing the quality and impact of scientific contributions. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect