Publication productivity in geriatrics: 1995-2006.
Publication productivity in geriatrics: 1995-2006.
复制标题
老年病学的出版效率：1995-2006 年。
DOI：
10.1093/gerona/63.6.584
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Ferrucci,Luigi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Morley,JohnE;Ferrucci,Luigi
THE understanding and future development of a field is dependent on its history (1). History creates the values of a field. History also allows a field to move forward without repeating the mistakes of the past. This is particularly important in modern geriatrics where there are continuous forces touting the science and the pseudoscience of rejuvenation—that is, the anti-aging movement—and others who minimize the importance of science in favor of ‘‘high touch’’care and undervalue the need for a rigorous scientific training (2–5). Recently, the history of geriatrics has been chronicled (6–8) as has the history of nursing homes (9).Isaac Asimov in the ‘‘Foundation’’trilogy predicted that eventually a statistical form of history would allow scientific predictions of the future. This concept was utilized to develop a series of articles in the Journal on the Future History of Geriatrics (10–12). With the development of the ISI indexing system, it is now possible to examine statistically the relevancy of a scientist to a particular field. For scientists, the number of publications, the total and average number of citations, and the h-factor can all be used to determine the impact of a scientist on a field. The h-index is the number of papers a scientist has published that have received at least as many citations as the number of published papers up to that point (13–15). This form of impact assessment is considered to be a more transparent and unbiased measure of scientific productivity than are many other measures, and avoids the possibility that one single, although highly cited paper, could influence excessively the citation score. In an attempt to examine the productivity of geriatricians, we have utilized the ISI Web of Science online database (http://apps. isiknowledge. com/WoS/CIW. cgi, accessed 1/7/07). As a first approximation list, without any pretense of being exhaustive, we considered all members of the 2006 editorial boards of the Journals of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Age and Aging, American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, and Alzheimer’s Disease and Associated Disorders as well as the 2007 expanded editorial board of the Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. The abstracted data allowed a statistical view of papers published by these scientists from 1995 to 2006. It excludes the impact of
