, Volume 80, Issue 3, pp 747–760 | Cite as

Measuring the influence of clinical trials citations on several bibliometric indicators

  • Antonio García RomeroEmail author
  • José Navarrete Cortés
  • Cristina Escudero
  • Juan Antonio Fernández López
  • Juan Antonio Chaichío Moreno


The practice of publishing clinical trials in scientific journals is common, although not without its critics. This study aims to measure the effect of clinical trials citations on several bibliometric indicators: citations per document (CD); journal impact factor (JIF); relative h-index (RhI) and strike rate index (SRI). We select all the citable documents published in the NEJM, Lancet, JAMA, AIM and BMJ, for the period 2000-2004, and record the citations received by those papers from 2000 to 2005. Our results show that clinical trials have a CD significantly higher than those for conventional papers; JIF is lower when clinical trials are excluded, especially for NEJM, Lancet and JAMA. Finally, both RhI and SRI seem to be unaffected by clinical trials citations.


Journal Impact Factor Bibliometric Indicator Citable Document Pharmaceutical Innovation Editorial Material 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barendse, W. (2007), The strike rate index: a new index for journal quality based on journal size and the h-index of citations. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 4(3).
  2. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A. (2006), A Hirsch-type index for journals, Scientometrics, 69(1): 169–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cami, J. (1997), Impactolatría: diagnóstico y tratamiento. Medicina Clínica, 109: 515–524.Google Scholar
  4. Campanario, J. M., Gonzalez, L. (2006), Journal self-citations that contribute to the impact factor: Documents labeled “editorial material” in journals covered by the Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 69(2): 365–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campanario, J. M., Gonzalez, L., Rodriguez, C. (2006), Structure of the impact factor of academic journals in the field of Education and Educational Psychology: Citations from editorial board members. Scientometrics, 69(1): 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R., Walsh, J. P. (2002), Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DTI, BIA & Department of Health (2003), Bioscience 2015. Improving National Health, Increasing National Wealth. Retrieved January 15, 2007 from:
  8. Fassoulaki, A., Paraskeva, A., Papilas, K., Karabinis, G. (2000), Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factor. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 84(2): 266–269.Google Scholar
  9. Hirsch, J.E. (2005), An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings’ of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102: 16569–16572, Scholar
  10. House of Commons Health Committee, The Influence of the Pharmaceutical industry. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from:, 2005.
  11. Jellinek, N. J., Desousa, R. A., Bernhard, J. D. (2004), The clinical influence of the JAAD. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 50: 470–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Koenig, M. E. D. (1997), A bibliometric analysis of pharmaceutical research. Research Policy, 12: 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kostoff, R. N. (2007), The difference between highly and poorly cited medical articles in the journal Lancet. Scientometrics, 72(3): 513–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kulkarni, A. V., Busse, J. V., Shams, I. (2007), Characteristics associated with citation rate of the medical literature. PLoS ONE, 2(5): e403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lewison, G. (2002), From biomedical research to health improvement. Scientometrics, 54(2): 179–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lichtenberg, F. R., Pharmaceutical innovation, mortality reduction, and economic growth. In: K. M. Murphy, R. H. Topel (Eds), Measuring the Gains from Medical Research: an Economic Approach (pp. 74–109). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  17. Moed, H. F., VAN Leeuwen, T. N. (1994), Improving the accuracy of Institute for Scientific Information’s Journal Impact Factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6): 461–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. OECD, The measurement of scientific and technological activities. Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development. Paris: OECD, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. Rochon, P. A., Gurwitz, J. H., Simms, R. W., et al. (1994). A study of manufactured-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of Arthritis. Archives of Internal Medicine, 154: 157–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rousseau, R. (2006), A case study: evolution of JASIS’ h-index (in Chinese). Science Focus, 1(1): 16–17. English version: E-LIS: ID-code 5430.Google Scholar
  21. Seglen, P.O. (1997), Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314: 497.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, R., Roberts, I. (2006), Patient safety requires a new way to publish clinical trials. Public Library of Science Clinical Trials, e6: 1–3.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, R. (2003), Medical journals and pharmaceutical companies: uneasy bedfellows. British Medical Journal, 326: 1202–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith, R. (2005a), Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. Public Library of Science Medicine, 2(5): e138.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, R. (2005b), Curbing the influence of the drug industry: a British view. Public Library of Science Medicine, 2(9): e241.Google Scholar
  26. Smith, R. (2006), The trouble with medical journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99: 115–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Suarez-Almanzor, M. E., Belseck, E., Homik, J., Dorgan, M., Ramos-Remus, C. (2000), Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases: Medline alone is not enough. Controlled Clinical Trials, 21: 476–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yu, G., Wang, L. (2007), The self-cited rate of scientific journals and the manipulation of their impact factors. Scientometrics, 73(3): 321–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio García Romero
    • 1
    Email author
  • José Navarrete Cortés
    • 2
  • Cristina Escudero
    • 3
  • Juan Antonio Fernández López
    • 2
  • Juan Antonio Chaichío Moreno
    • 4
  1. 1.Agencia Laín Entralgo. Consejería de Sanidad (Comunidad de Madrid)MadridSpain
  2. 2.Universidad de JaénJaénSpain
  3. 3.Hospital Puerta de HierroMadridSpain
  4. 4.Universidad de AlmeríaAlmeríaSpain

Personalised recommendations