首页> 外文期刊>CytoJournal >Authors attain comparable or slightly higher rates of citation publishing in an open access journal (CytoJournal) compared to traditional cytopathology journals - A five year (2007-2011) experience
【24h】

Authors attain comparable or slightly higher rates of citation publishing in an open access journal (CytoJournal) compared to traditional cytopathology journals - A five year (2007-2011) experience

机译:与传统细胞病理学期刊相比,作者在开放获取期刊(CytoJournal)中获得的引用发表率相当或略高-五年(2007-2011)经验

获取原文
       

摘要

Background:The era of Open Access (OA) publication, a platform which serves to better disseminate scientific knowledge, is upon us, as more OA journals are in existence than ever before. The idea that peer-reviewed OA publication leads to higher rates of citation has been put forth and shown to be true in several publications. This is a significant benefit to authors and is in addition to another relatively less obvious but highly critical component of the OA charter, i.e. retention of the copyright by the authors in the public domain. In this study, we analyzed the citation rates of OA and traditional non-OA publications specifically for authors in the field of cytopathology.Design:We compared the citation patterns for authors who had published in both OA and traditional non-OA peer-reviewed, scientific, cytopathology journals. Citations in an OA publication (CytoJournal) were analyzed comparatively with traditional non-OA cytopathology journals (Acta Cytologica, Cancer Cytopathology, Cytopathology, and Diagnostic Cytopathology) using the data from web of science citation analysis site (based on which the impact factors (IF) are calculated). After comparing citations per publication, as well as a time adjusted citation quotient (which takes into account the time since publication), we also analyzed the statistics after excluding the data for meeting abstracts.Results:Total 28 authors published 314 publications as articles and meeting abstracts (25 authors after excluding the abstracts). The rate of citation and time adjusted citation quotient were higher for OA in the group where abstracts were included (P < 0.05 for both). The rates were also slightly higher for OA than non-OA when the meeting abstracts were excluded, but the difference was statistically insignificant (P = 0.57 and P = 0.45).ConclusionWe observed that for the same author, the publications in the OA journal attained a higher rate of citation than the publications in the traditional non-OA journals in the field of cytopathology over a 5 year period (2007-2011). However, this increase was statistically insignificant if the meeting abstracts were excluded from the analysis. Overall, the rates of citation for OA and non-OA were slightly higher to comparable.
机译:背景:开放存取(OA)出版物的时代已经来临,这是一个可以更好地传播科学知识的平台,因为OA期刊的数量比以往任何时候都多。同行评议的OA出版物导致更高的引用率的想法已经提出,并且在一些出版物中都证明是正确的。这对作者来说是一个重大好处,并且是OA宪章中另一个相对不太明显但非常关键的组成部分,即作者在公共领域保留版权。在这项研究中,我们分析了专门针对细胞病理学领域的OA和传统非OA出版物的引用率。设计:我们比较了在OA和传统非OA同行评审中发表的作者的引用方式,科学,细胞病理学期刊。 OA出版物(CytoJournal)中的引用与传统的非OA细胞病理学期刊(Acta Cytologica,Cancer Cyttopathology,Cytopathology和Diagnostic Cytopathology)进行了比较分析,使用的是科学引文分析网站的数据(基于影响因子(IF )。在比较了每篇出版物的引文以及经过时间调整的引文商(考虑到出版以来的时间)之后,我们还在排除会议摘要数据后对统计数据进行了分析。结果:总共28位作者发表了314个出版物作为文章和会议摘要(排除摘要后有25位作者)。在包括摘要的组中,OA的引用率和时间调整后的引用商较高(两者均P <0.05)。当排除会议摘要时,OA的发生率也比非OA的稍高,但差异在统计学上不显着(P = 0.57和P = 0.45)。结论我们观察到,对于同一作者,OA期刊的出版物获得了在5年内(2007-2011年),其引用率高于传统非OA期刊在细胞病理学领域的出版物。但是,如果将会议摘要从分析中排除,则该增加在统计上是微不足道的。总体而言,OA和非OA的引用率略高于同类。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号