Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine and Hackensack Meridian Health (HMH) Network, Edison, New Jersey.
Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona.
J Surg Res. 2023 Aug;288:282-289. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2023.02.026. Epub 2023 Apr 10.
While impact factor (IF) remains the "gold standard" metric for journal quality, newer metrics are gaining popularity. These include the H5-index and journal Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). We explored the relationship between the IF, H5-index, and AAS for core general surgery (GS) and subspecialty journals.
For all GS and subspecialty journals with a Clarivate IF, H5-index (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021) and journal AAS were obtained. Journal Twitter presence and activity was sourced from Twitter and the Twitter application programming interface. Spearman's correlations were assessed for numeric variables.
A total of 105 journals were included, around half (49/105; 46.7%) of which were core GS journals. Median IF was 2.48 and median H5-index 19. Journal IF demonstrated a strong correlation with H5-index overall (r = 0.81), though this ranged from r = 0.95 (P < 0.01) for vascular surgery to r = 0.77 (P < 0.01) for plastic surgery journals. AAS was moderately correlated with the IF and H5-index (r = 0.59 and 0.62, respectively; both P < 0.01). R values ranging indicated that 66% of the variation in the H5-index and 35% of the variation in AAS was explained by the IF. Just over half the journals had a Twitter account (54/105; 51.4%). Journals with a Twitter account also had a significantly higher IF, H5-index, and AAS than those without a Twitter account (all P < 0.01). AAS was moderately correlated with Twitter activity (r = 0.59) and Twitter followers (r = 0.69).
Across GS and subspecialty journals, journal IF correlates strongly with the H5-index and moderately with AAS. However, only 35% of variation in AAS and 66% of variation in the H5-index is explained by the IF, indicating that these metrics measure unique aspects of journal quality. The future growth of surgical journals should be geared towards improving across multiple metrics, including both the conventional and the contemporary, while leveraging social media to improve readership and eventual academic impact.
虽然影响因子（IF）仍然是期刊质量的“金标准”指标，但新的指标正越来越受欢迎。这些指标包括 H5 指数和期刊的 Altmetric 关注得分（AAS）。我们探讨了核心普通外科（GS）和亚专业期刊的 IF、H5 指数和 AAS 之间的关系。
获取所有具有科睿唯安 IF、H5 指数（2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2021 年 12 月 31 日）和期刊 AAS 的 GS 和亚专业期刊。从 Twitter 和 Twitter 应用程序编程接口获取期刊的 Twitter 存在和活动情况。对数值变量进行 Spearman 相关性评估。
共纳入 105 种期刊，其中约一半（49/105；46.7%）为核心 GS 期刊。IF 的中位数为 2.48，H5 指数的中位数为 19。期刊 IF 与 H5 指数总体上呈强相关性（r=0.81），但范围从血管外科的 r=0.95（P<0.01）到整形外科学杂志的 r=0.77（P<0.01）。AAS 与 IF 和 H5 指数中度相关（r=0.59 和 0.62，均 P<0.01）。R 值表明，H5 指数的 66%和 AAS 的 35%的变异可由 IF 解释。超过一半的期刊有 Twitter 账户（54/105；51.4%）。有 Twitter 账户的期刊的 IF、H5 指数和 AAS 均显著高于没有 Twitter 账户的期刊（均 P<0.01）。AAS 与 Twitter 活动（r=0.59）和 Twitter 关注者（r=0.69）中度相关。
在 GS 和亚专业期刊中，期刊 IF 与 H5 指数高度相关，与 AAS 中度相关。然而，AAS 的 35%和 H5 指数的 66%的变异仅由 IF 解释，表明这些指标衡量了期刊质量的独特方面。未来外科期刊的发展应着眼于提高多个指标，包括传统指标和现代指标，同时利用社交媒体提高读者数量，并最终提高学术影响力。
