Ten years of the journal Radiology and oncology: some bibliometric evaluation

Matjaž Musek (Author), Marjeta Oven (Author), Primož Južnič (Author)

Abstract

Background. Bibliometrics and its methods are a useful set of tools for analysing a scientific journal's relative position in the field. By measuring different quantitative data and comparing them with other journals in the field, certain decisions can be made as to the future of the journal. Objectives and methods. We thought as appropriate to take last ten years of Radiology and Oncology (1992-2001) and put that content to double scrutiny: first, by applying various guantitative measurements to the journal's content to get a more objective picture of the whole and of its development in the past ten years; then by additionally comparing it to another international journal from the field and of similar orientation, Neoplasma, to illustrate ifdifferences and/or similarities between the two are in favour of or detriment to Radiology and Oncology. Results and conclusion. Results show thatRadiology and Oncology has been progressing in the right direction, but that extra efforts should be made by the editors and the editorial board to attract more articles per issue and to gradually increase the share of experimental articles to boost its impact in the field. Also, to improve its visibility, editors, reviewers and also authors that publish in Radiology and Oncology could consider citing the articles published in this journal, in the articles published elsewhere, when appropriate.

Keywords

No keyword data available

Data

Language:	English
Year of publishing:	2003
Typology:	1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:	OI - Institute of Oncology
Publisher:	Association of Radiology and Oncology
UDC:	615.8
COBISS:	16999641
ISSN:	1318-2099
Views:	41
Downloads:	12
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	Slovenian
Secondary title:	Deset let revije Radiology and oncology: nekaj bibliometrijskih izmer
Secondary abstract:	Izhodišče. Bibliometrija s svojimi metodami predstavlja zelo koristen nabor orodij za analiziranje relativne pomembnosti strokovne revije znotraj njene stroke. S pomočjo kvantitativnih meritev vsebine in primerjavami s podobnimi revijami v stroki si tudi uredniki lahko pomagajo pri odločitvah glede nadaljnih usmeritev uredniške politike. Cilji in metode. Vzeli smo zadnjih deset letnikov (1992-2001) revije Radiology and Oncology in njeno celotno vsebino spustili skozi dvojno merjenje: s prvim merjenjem smo zasledovali cilj, da se s pomočjo raznih kvantitativnih bibliometričnih metod pridobi boljobjektivna slika o celotni reviji in njenem razvoju v zadnjih desetih letih; nato pa smo s pomočjo primerjave s sorodno mednarodno revijo, Neoplasma, ugotovljali, če so razlike in/ali podobnosti med obema, obravnavanireviji v korist ali škodo. Rezultati in zaključek. Rezultati kažejo, da se je revija dobro razvila, toda potrebni bodo dodatni napori ožjega uredništva in aktivna pomoč uredniškega odbora, da privabijo več kvalitetnih dankov in s tem povečajo njihovo število na zvezek, ter da postopoma povečujejo delež eksperimentalnih člankov, kar, kot kažejo izkušnje,lahko zviša relativni vpliv revije v stroki. Revija bi si lahko tudi povečala ugled tako, da bi vsi avtorji, ki v njej objavljajo, svoje objave v Radiology and Onocology smiselno vključevali med citate v članke, ki jih objavljajo drugje.
Secondary keywords:	Medical Oncology;Radiology;Periodicals;Bibliometrics;Bibliometrija;Medicinska onkologija;Periodika;Radiologija;
Source comment:	BSDOCID101586;
Pages:	str. 141-153
Volume:	ǂLetn. ǂ37
Issue:	ǂšt. ǂ3
Chronology:	2003
ID:	22859788