Royle Pamela, Waugh Norman
Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
BMC Res Notes. 2015 Dec 30;8:833. doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1825-1.
Bibliometric indicators, based on measuring patterns of publications and citations, are widely used by universities and research funders to assess research performance. Our aims were to: (1) perform a bibliometric analysis of UK macular disease research publications from 2011 to 2014 and compare this with the other countries producing major output in the area, and (2) compare the pattern of UK macular disease publication with the priorities for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) developed by the Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (SLV-PSP).
We used the Scopus database to retrieve macular disease articles published from 2011 to 2014. Citations to articles from 2011 to 2013 and journal impact factors (JIFs) for 2014 articles were obtained. Articles with UK authors were allocated to the 10 SLV-PSP priorities for age-related macular degeneration (AMD), where possible.
The UK, USA, and Germany and China were the top four producers of macular disease research from 2011 to 2013. All except China had a higher proportion of citations than articles. There were 421 articles with UK authors published from 2011 to 2014, of which 49% had international collaborators. The UK produced 9.7% of the world's output of macular disease articles from 2011 to 2013, but received 14.2% of the world's share of citations. UK authors' share of the world's top 10% of cited publications from 2011 to 2013 was 16.2%. In 2014, 13.2% of UK articles were in journals in the top 10% when ranked by Journal Impact Factors (JIFs), while the overall UK article share for that year was 9.9%. UK articles did not show a strong correlation between citations and JIFs. The SLV-PSP published a set of 10 priorities for research into age-related macular degeneration in October 2103. Only 8% of the UK's 2011-2014 publications matched the SLV-PSP top priority (treatment to stop dry AMD progressing) and 34% did not match any of the SLV-PSP priorities, mainly because the priorities did not include invasive treatment of wet AMD.
The UK is performing well in macular research, based on bibliometric indicators. The distribution of past research topics does not match the priorities set by the SLV-PSP.
基于出版物和引用模式测量的文献计量指标被大学和研究资助者广泛用于评估研究绩效。我们的目的是：（1）对2011年至2014年英国黄斑疾病研究出版物进行文献计量分析，并与该领域其他主要产出国家进行比较；（2）将英国黄斑疾病出版物的模式与视力丧失和视力优先事项设定伙伴关系（SLV-PSP）制定的年龄相关性黄斑变性（AMD）优先事项进行比较。
我们使用Scopus数据库检索2011年至2014年发表的黄斑疾病文章。获取了2011年至2013年文章的引用情况以及2014年文章的期刊影响因子（JIF）。尽可能将有英国作者的文章分配到SLV-PSP的10个年龄相关性黄斑变性（AMD）优先事项中。
英国、美国、德国和中国是2011年至2013年黄斑疾病研究的前四大产出国。除中国外，其他国家的引用比例均高于文章比例。2011年至2014年有421篇有英国作者的文章发表，其中49%有国际合作者。英国在2011年至2013年产出了全球9.7%的黄斑疾病文章，但获得了全球14.2%的引用份额。2011年至2013年英国作者在全球被引用最多的前10%出版物中的份额为16.2%。2014年，按期刊影响因子（JIF）排名，13.2%的英国文章发表在排名前10%的期刊上，而当年英国文章的总体份额为9.9%。英国文章的引用与JIF之间没有很强的相关性。SLV-PSP于2013年10月发布了一套10项年龄相关性黄斑变性研究的优先事项。2011年至2014年英国出版物中只有8%符合SLV-PSP的首要优先事项（阻止干性AMD进展的治疗），34%不符合SLV-PSP的任何优先事项主要是因为这些优先事项不包括湿性AMD的侵入性治疗。
基于文献计量指标，英国在黄斑研究方面表现良好。过去研究主题的分布与SLV-PSP设定的优先事项不匹配。
