Comments on: Citation Trend Line For PLoS Journals

By: minli

minli — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 15:53:04 +0000

Hi people. I just created a poll for the estimate of the first PloS ONE impact factor.

please give your guess at
http://andrew.cmu.edu/user/minlix/poll_plosone.html

thanks

By: nico

nico — Thu, 21 May 2009 08:25:08 +0000

A very interesting comment on this topic…
http://www.plos.org/cms/node/28

By: Scopus

Scopus — Mon, 11 May 2009 22:24:25 +0000

Confessions of a Scopus user…Plos Journal and Journal A.
http://bit.ly/IR4t3

By: Linda Castañeda

Linda Castañeda — Mon, 04 May 2009 06:11:17 +0000

I hope it was a permanent trend #openknowledge in journals http://tinyurl.com/daysdz

By: Pedro Beltrao

Pedro Beltrao — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:38:00 +0000

@Bjorn , assuming that the distribution of citations per article will have a similar log normal distribution for most journals I think that is correct. I think the ranking can change but not drastically so. I looked at 10 journals from the same publisher (Nature) from the same year (2007) and the citation information from Scopus (all citations since publication). The correlation between average and median values was 0.96 for these 10 journals.

By: Björn Brembs

Björn Brembs — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:38:00 +0000

@pedro: interesting statement that calculating e.g. the median would not change journal rank as compared to arithmetic mean. Conjecture or have you tested that? I’m not sure one way or another, hence, I’d be really interested in such a comparison.

By: abhishektiwari

abhishektiwari — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:47:41 +0000

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I guess during discussion I also mentioned above two points: bias due to time line and no of article. Trend line should be observed as trends, particularly how it changing and certainly it’s not a quantifier for the quality of journal, but it does reflect growth of journal.

By: i_love_stats

i_love_stats — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:04:42 +0000

The Trend Line is a stupid measure because of two reasons:
1) there is no time limit on the citation count: a journal that published 20 years already, has papers from 20 years to be cited. A journal that publishes since 2 years has papers from 2 years that can be cited. Now guess what? The first journal will probably receive more citations, thus – by trend – have a higher Trend Line. Generally speaking, looking at yearly citation counts from journals reveals that most journal have an exponential growth in citations.
2) Does an increased Trend Lin mean the journal receives more citations? Not necessary – it could be that the number of papers published dropped significantly.

By: Adam Ratner

Adam Ratner — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 03:55:27 +0000

is reading about citation trend lines for #PLoS journals. http://www.abhishek-tiwari.com/2009/04/citationtrend-line-for-plos-journals.html

By: Abhishek Tiwari

Abhishek Tiwari — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 00:22:00 +0000

For that purpose I used Scopus data and Scimago ranking is based on same data and same parameters. Scimago dont rank PLoS One yet