Citation Skew in Plastic Surgery Journals: Does the Journal Impact Factor Predict Individual Article Citation Rate?. (20th November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Asaad, Malke; Kallarackal, Austin Paul; Meaike, Jesse; Rajesh, Aashish; de Azevedo, Rafael U; Tran, Nho V
• Is Part Of: Aesthetic surgery journal. Volume 40:Number 10(2020)
• Page Start: 1136
• Page End: 1142
• Publication Date: 2019-11-20
• Subjects: Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; 617.95
• DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjz336
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1090-820X

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Citation skew refers to the unequal distribution of citations to articles published in a particular journal. Objectives: We aimed to assess whether citation skew exists within plastic surgery journals and to determine whether the journal impact factor (JIF) is an accurate indicator of the citation rates of individual articles. Methods: We used Journal Citation Reports to identify all journals within the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. The number of citations in 2018 for all individual articles published in 2016 and 2017 was abstracted. Results: Thirty-three plastic surgery journals were identified, publishing 9823 articles. The citation distribution showed right skew, with the majority of articles having either 0 or 1 citation (40% and 25%, respectively). A total of 3374 (34%) articles achieved citation rates similar to or higher than their journal's IF, whereas 66% of articles failed to achieve a citation rate equal to the JIF. Review articles achieved higher citation rates (median, 2) than original articles (median, 1) ( P < 0.0001). Overall, 50% of articles contributed to 93.7% of citations and 12.6% of articles contributed to 50% of citations. A weak positive correlation was found between the number of citations and the JIF ( r = 0.327, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Citation skew exists within plastic surgery journals as in other fields of biomedical science. Most articles did not achieve citation rates equal to the JIF with a small percentage of articles having a disproportionate influence on citations and the JIF. Therefore, the JIF should not be used to assess the quality and impact of individual scientific work.