{"title":"Author Self-Citation in the Turkish Otorhinolaryngology Literature.","authors":"Ali Bayram","doi":"10.4274/tao.2021.2021-5-16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the prevalence and other characteristics of author self-citations in six Turkey-originated general otorhinolaryngology (ORL) journals of Turkish ORL literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 970 articles published in six Turkey-originated general ORL journals (ENT Updates, Journal of Ear Nose Throat and Head Neck Surgery, KBB-Forum, Praxis of Otorhinolaryngology, The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose and Throat, and Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology) in 2016-2020 were analyzed for author self-citations. The association between author self-citations and journal types, study types, study topics, country of origin, and compatibility with the topic were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 265 author self-citations (0.273 per article) which corresponded to 1.36% of all citations. There was no significant difference between the journal types, study topics, and origin of the studies in terms of mean self-citation values per study, whereas case reports had significantly lower self-citations than review and original investigations. There were three citations (1.1%) that were irrelevant to the study topic.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that investigated the practice of author self-citation in Turkish ORL literature. Author self-citation rate in the Turkish-originated general ORL journals was found remarkably lower than the medical literature, whereas the self-citations were found compatible with the study topic to a very large extent. Members of the scientific community including authors, readers, and journal editors should be cautious regarding the unethical practices of self-citations.</p>","PeriodicalId":44240,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/4f/d2/tao-59-210.PMC8527536.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tao.2021.2021-5-16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the prevalence and other characteristics of author self-citations in six Turkey-originated general otorhinolaryngology (ORL) journals of Turkish ORL literature.
Methods: A total of 970 articles published in six Turkey-originated general ORL journals (ENT Updates, Journal of Ear Nose Throat and Head Neck Surgery, KBB-Forum, Praxis of Otorhinolaryngology, The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose and Throat, and Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology) in 2016-2020 were analyzed for author self-citations. The association between author self-citations and journal types, study types, study topics, country of origin, and compatibility with the topic were also evaluated.
Results: There were 265 author self-citations (0.273 per article) which corresponded to 1.36% of all citations. There was no significant difference between the journal types, study topics, and origin of the studies in terms of mean self-citation values per study, whereas case reports had significantly lower self-citations than review and original investigations. There were three citations (1.1%) that were irrelevant to the study topic.
Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that investigated the practice of author self-citation in Turkish ORL literature. Author self-citation rate in the Turkish-originated general ORL journals was found remarkably lower than the medical literature, whereas the self-citations were found compatible with the study topic to a very large extent. Members of the scientific community including authors, readers, and journal editors should be cautious regarding the unethical practices of self-citations.
目的:评价6种土耳其普通耳鼻喉科(general otorhinolaryngology, ORL)期刊土耳其ORL文献的作者自引率及其特点。方法:对2016-2020年发表在6种土耳其源性ORL期刊(ENT Updates、Journal of Ear Nose咽喉and Head Neck Surgery、kbr - forum、Praxis of Otorhinolaryngology、The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose and Throat、Turkish Archives of otorhinolyngology)上的970篇文章进行作者自引分析。作者自引与期刊类型、研究类型、研究主题、原产国以及与主题的兼容性之间的关系也被评估。结果:作者自引用265篇(0.273篇/篇)，占总被引数的1.36%。每份研究的平均自引值在期刊类型、研究主题和研究来源之间没有显著差异，而病例报告的自引率明显低于综述和原始调查。有3次引用(1.1%)与研究主题无关。结论:据我们所知，这是第一个调查土耳其ORL文献中作者自引实践的研究。土耳其文普通ORL期刊的作者自引率明显低于医学文献，而自引与研究主题有很大程度的契合。包括作者、读者和期刊编辑在内的科学界成员应该警惕自我引用的不道德行为。
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
