Resilience and Recalibration of Bibliometric Indicators in Neurosciences and Neuropharmacology Journals After COVID-19: A Longitudinal Rate of Change Analysis Using Mixed-Effects Models.

Abstract

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented changes in the scholarly publishing landscape, particularly in biomedical fields such as Neurosciences and Neuropharmacology. Several journals experienced steep, short-term increases in citation metrics during 2020-2022. However, it remains uncertain whether these surges reflected a sustainable impact or temporary inflation. This study aimed to analyze post-pandemic bibliometric behavior by evaluating the Rate of Change (RoC) in key journal-level indicators from 2013 to 2023.

Methods: A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted on 233 neuroscience journals indexed in the Journal Citation Reports. Six indicators were analyzed: Journal Impact Factor (JIF), Eigenfactor Score, Immediacy Index, Article Influence Score, Cited Half-Life, and Total Citations. RoC was calculated for each metric on an annual basis. Mixed-effects models with random intercepts and slopes were constructed to evaluate longitudinal trajectories and identify changes associated with three defined periods: prepandemic (2013-2019), pandemic (2020-2022), and post-pandemic (2023). Subgroup analyses assessed journal quartiles and categories to explore variations in impact resilience.

Results: The pandemic period (2020-2022) showed significant increases in RoC for JIF (mean β = +4.85, p = 0.004), Immediacy Index (β = +6.22, p = 0.002), and Total Citations (β = +5.88, p < 0.001). These changes were more prominent in top-quartile journals and those classified under Neuropharmacology. In contrast, alternative metrics such as the Eigenfactor Score and Article Influence Score remained relatively stable across the same period. In 2023, most indicators exhibited a normalization trend, with JIF and Immediacy Index showing marked deceleration in RoC, suggesting a post-pandemic recalibration. Journals with sustained positive trajectories were primarily concentrated in high-impact clusters, with Current Neuropharmacology ranking among the top performers by RoC slope.

Discussion: The findings demonstrate that the surge in citations during the pandemic was primarily transitory and varied across bibliometric indicators. Traditional metrics like JIF and Immediacy Index were more sensitive to systemic shocks, while influence-based indicators (Eigenfactor and Article Influence Score) showed higher temporal resilience. The application of RoC allowed for a nuanced interpretation of metric trajectories and minimized misinterpretation of short-term spikes. Limitations include reliance on publicly available data and potential lag effects in citation behavior not fully captured within the 10-year window.

Conclusion: This study reveals that pandemic-era citation inflation in Neuroscience journals was largely temporary and metric-dependent. RoC-based modeling offers a reproducible and adaptable approach for assessing the sustainability of bibliometric trends. These insights can help editors, funders, and academic institutions better understand journal performance, make informed decisions about research dissemination, and refine metrics-based evaluation frameworks in the post-pandemic publishing environment.