Bibliometric analysis of anaesthesia journal editorial board members: correlation between journal impact factor and the median h-index of its board members.

BACKGROUND h-index is useful for quantifying scholarly activity in medicine, but this statistic has not been extensively applied as a measure of productivity in anaesthesia. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of h-index in editorial board members and tested the hypothesis that editorial board members of anaesthesia journals with higher impact factors (IFs) have higher h-indices. METHODS Ten of 19 journals with 2009 IF>1 were randomly chosen from Journal Citation Reports(®). Board members were identified using each journal's website. Publications, citations, citations per publication, and h-index for each member were obtained using Scopus(®). RESULTS Four hundred and twenty-three individuals filled 481 anaesthesia editorial board positions. The median h-index of all editorial board members was 14. Board members published 75 papers (median) with 1006 citations and 13 citations per publication. Members serving on journals with IF greater than median had significantly (P<0.05; Wilcoxon's rank-sum test) greater median h-index, citations, and citations per publication than those at journals with IF less than median. A significant correlation between the median h-index of a journal's editorial board members and its IF (h-index=3.01×IF+6.85; r( 2)=0.452; P=0.033) was observed for the 10 journals examined. Board members of subspeciality-specific journals had bibliometric indices that were less than those at general journals. The h-index was greater in individuals serving more than one journal. European editorial board members had higher h-index values than their American colleagues. CONCLUSIONS The results suggest that editorial board members of anaesthesia journals with higher IFs have higher h-indices.

[1]  M. Crawford,et al.  Bibliographic characteristics of the research output of pediatric anesthesiologists in Canada , 2010, Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie.

[2]  M. Nahata,et al.  New indices in scholarship assessment. , 2009, American journal of pharmaceutical education.

[3]  S. Bhayani,et al.  Does citation analysis reveal association between h-index and academic rank in urology? , 2009, Urology.

[4]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[5]  N. Mohaghegh,et al.  WHY THE IMPACT FACTOR OF JOURNALS SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR EVALUATING RESEARCH , 2005 .

[6]  M V Dodson,et al.  Citation analysis: Maintenance of h-index and use of e-index. , 2009, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[7]  Kuan-Teh Jeang,et al.  Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and Retrovirology: is it time to individualize citation metrics? , 2007, Retrovirology.

[8]  R. van Haselen,et al.  The h-index: a new way of assessing the scientific impact of individual CAM authors. , 2007, Complementary therapies in medicine.

[9]  A. Paraskeva,et al.  Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factor. , 2000, British journal of anaesthesia.

[10]  Kai Simons,et al.  The Misused Impact Factor , 2008, Science.

[11]  David F Kallmes,et al.  The H-index in academic radiology. , 2010, Academic radiology.

[12]  W. Couldwell,et al.  Use of the h index in neurosurgery. Clinical article. , 2009, Journal of neurosurgery.

[13]  M. Jennions,et al.  The h index and career assessment by numbers. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[14]  J. Wilberger,et al.  Survey of the h index for all of academic neurosurgery: another power-law phenomenon? , 2010, Journal of neurosurgery.

[15]  Michael C. Wendl,et al.  H-index: however ranked, citations need context , 2007, Nature.

[16]  A. Paraskeva,et al.  Impact factor bias and proposed adjustments for its determination , 2002, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[17]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Relative Citation Impact of Various Study Designs in the Health Sciences , 2005, JAMA.

[18]  Angelos Hatzakis,et al.  Assessing the impact of biomedical research in academic institutions of disparate sizes , 2009, BMC medical research methodology.

[19]  Abner L Notkins.  Neutralizing the Impact Factor Culture , 2008, Science.

[20]  A. Melemeni,et al.  Academic anesthesiologists’ views on the importance of the impact factor of scientific journals: a North American and European survey , 2001, Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie.

[21]  J. Hirsch.  Does the h index have predictive power? , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  A. Kulkarni,et al.  Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. , 2009, JAMA.

[23]  D. C. Mishra.  Citations: rankings weigh against developing nations , 2008, Nature.

[24]  Charles R. Thomas,et al.  Bibliometric analysis of radiation oncology departmental scholarly publication productivity at domestic residency training institutions. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[25]  Leif Engqvist,et al.  The h-index and self-citations. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[26]  M. Castillo.  Measuring Academic Output: The H-Index , 2010, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[27]  Matthew E Falagas,et al.  “Eigenlob”: self‐citation in biomedical journals , 2006, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.