Krista Louise Alexander, Katharine Hall, Yuling Max Chen
{"title":"图书馆员对知识综合文章的参与及其与文章被引数和期刊影响因子的关系。","authors":"Krista Louise Alexander, Katharine Hall, Yuling Max Chen","doi":"10.29173/jchla29798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Our aim was to determine if there is a relationship between librarian involvement on a knowledge synthesis project and the synthesis's citation count or the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of its publication venue.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 551 knowledge syntheses published during a one-year period (2020) from a single category, \"Psychology, Clinical\", in Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports were exported from Web of Science along with the citation counts for each synthesis and the JIF of its publication venue. The full-text of each article was examined in order to code each as either co-author, acknowledged, or unknown to reflect the level of librarian involvement in the synthesis. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test on bootstrapped samples was used to determine the significance of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Librarians were co-authors or acknowledged in 80 (15%) of the syntheses examined. Analyzing two levels of librarian involvement (involved, unknown) indicated no relationship between the level of librarian involvement and the JIF of the journal nor the citation count the synthesis received since publication.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is no evidence of a relationship between librarian involvement in knowledge syntheses and the JIF of the publication or citation count of documents published in journals falling in the JCR category of \"Psychology, Clinical\" in the year 2020. Repeating this methodology in a different JCR category could help determine whether this lack of a relationship extends beyond the \"Psychology, Clinical\" category.</p>","PeriodicalId":42716,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association","volume":"45 3","pages":"137-146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11881647/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Librarian involvement on knowledge synthesis articles and its relationship to article citation count and Journal Impact Factor.\",\"authors\":\"Krista Louise Alexander, Katharine Hall, Yuling Max Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.29173/jchla29798\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Our aim was to determine if there is a relationship between librarian involvement on a knowledge synthesis project and the synthesis's citation count or the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of its publication venue.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 551 knowledge syntheses published during a one-year period (2020) from a single category, \\\"Psychology, Clinical\\\", in Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports were exported from Web of Science along with the citation counts for each synthesis and the JIF of its publication venue. The full-text of each article was examined in order to code each as either co-author, acknowledged, or unknown to reflect the level of librarian involvement in the synthesis. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test on bootstrapped samples was used to determine the significance of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Librarians were co-authors or acknowledged in 80 (15%) of the syntheses examined. Analyzing two levels of librarian involvement (involved, unknown) indicated no relationship between the level of librarian involvement and the JIF of the journal nor the citation count the synthesis received since publication.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is no evidence of a relationship between librarian involvement in knowledge syntheses and the JIF of the publication or citation count of documents published in journals falling in the JCR category of \\\"Psychology, Clinical\\\" in the year 2020. Repeating this methodology in a different JCR category could help determine whether this lack of a relationship extends beyond the \\\"Psychology, Clinical\\\" category.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":42716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association\",\"volume\":\"45 3\",\"pages\":\"137-146\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11881647/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29173/jchla29798\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29173/jchla29798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
前言:我们的目的是确定图书馆员参与知识综合项目与该综合项目的引用数或其出版地点的期刊影响因子(JIF)之间是否存在关系。方法:从Web of Science导出Clarivate期刊引文报告中“心理学、临床”单一类别在一年内(2020年)发表的551篇知识综合,以及每篇综合的被引次数及其出版地点的JIF。对每篇文章的全文进行了检查,以便将每篇文章编码为共同作者、已确认的或未知的,以反映图书管理员在综合中的参与程度。采用自举样本的Wilcoxon秩和检验来确定结果的显著性。结果:在80篇(15%)的论文中,图书馆员是共同作者或得到认可。分析图书馆员参与的两个层次(参与,未知)表明,图书馆员参与的水平与期刊的JIF以及自发表以来收到的综合引文数之间没有关系。讨论:没有证据表明图书馆员参与知识合成与JIF的出版或引用计数之间存在关系,JIF在2020年属于JCR“心理学,临床”类别的期刊上发表。在不同的JCR类别中重复这种方法可以帮助确定这种关系的缺乏是否超出了“心理学,临床”类别。
Librarian involvement on knowledge synthesis articles and its relationship to article citation count and Journal Impact Factor.
Introduction: Our aim was to determine if there is a relationship between librarian involvement on a knowledge synthesis project and the synthesis's citation count or the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of its publication venue.
Methods: A total of 551 knowledge syntheses published during a one-year period (2020) from a single category, "Psychology, Clinical", in Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports were exported from Web of Science along with the citation counts for each synthesis and the JIF of its publication venue. The full-text of each article was examined in order to code each as either co-author, acknowledged, or unknown to reflect the level of librarian involvement in the synthesis. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test on bootstrapped samples was used to determine the significance of the results.
Results: Librarians were co-authors or acknowledged in 80 (15%) of the syntheses examined. Analyzing two levels of librarian involvement (involved, unknown) indicated no relationship between the level of librarian involvement and the JIF of the journal nor the citation count the synthesis received since publication.
Discussion: There is no evidence of a relationship between librarian involvement in knowledge syntheses and the JIF of the publication or citation count of documents published in journals falling in the JCR category of "Psychology, Clinical" in the year 2020. Repeating this methodology in a different JCR category could help determine whether this lack of a relationship extends beyond the "Psychology, Clinical" category.