Citation bias and other determinants of citation in biomedical research: findings from six citation networks
| Autor: | Bram Duyx, Lex M. Bouter, Gerard M H Swaen, Maurice P. Zeegers, Miriam J.E. Urlings |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Tax Law, Research integrity, Epidemiology and Data Science, APH - Methodology, Maastricht University Office, RS: FHML Studio Europa Maastricht, RS: NUTRIM - R3 - Respiratory & Age-related Health, Genetica & Celbiologie, RS: FPN NPPP I, Section Neuropsychology, Complexe Genetica, Epidemiologie, RS: CAPHRI - R5 - Optimising Patient Care |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
Actuarial science
Impact factor Questionable research practices Epidemiology Logistic regression Random effects model Research findings Outcome (probability) 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Sample size determination Bibliometrics Research Design Humans Research questions Biomedical research 030212 general & internal medicine Citation bias Citation Psychology Citation network analyses H-index Publication Bias 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| Zdroj: | Journal of clinical epidemiology, 132, 71-78. Elsevier USA Urlings, M J E, Duyx, B, Swaen, G M H, Bouter, L M & Zeegers, M P 2021, ' Citation bias and other determinants of citation in biomedical research: findings from six citation networks ', Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 132, pp. 71-78 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.11.019 Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 132, 71-78. Elsevier USA Urlings, M J E, Duyx, B, Swaen, G M H, Bouter, L M & Zeegers, M P 2021, ' Citation bias and other determinants of citation in biomedical research : findings from six citation networks ', Journal of clinical epidemiology, vol. 132, pp. 71-78 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.11.019 Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 132, 71-78. Elsevier Science |
| ISSN: | 0895-4356 |
| Popis: | Objectives: When the probability of being cited depends on the outcome of that study, this is called citation bias. The aim of this study is to assess the determinants of citation and how these compare across six different biomedical research fields.Study Design and Setting: Citation network analyses were performed for six biomedical research questions. After identifying all relevant publications, all potential citations were mapped together with the actually performed citations in each network. As determinants of citation we assessed the following: study outcome, study design, sample size, journal impact factor, gender, affiliation, authority and continent of the corresponding author, funding source, title of the publication, number of references, and self-citation. Random effect logistic regression analysis was used to assess these factors.Results: Four out of six networks showed evidence for citation bias. Self-citation, authority of the author, and journal impact factor were also positively associated with the probability of citation in all networks. Conclusion: The probability of being cited seems associated with positive study outcomes, the authority of its authors, and the journal in which that article is published. In addition, each network showed specific characteristics that impact the citation dynamics and that need to be considered when performing and interpreting citation analyses. ? 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect