Abstract
Most biomedical journals accept original research articles in the form of “brief reports”. We compared the citations to full papers versus brief reports in a sample of journals on Infectious Diseases, Clinical Microbiology, and Antimicrobial Agents. Brief reports were cited less often than full-size articles [regression coefficient: 10.94 (95 % CI: 5.19, 16.69)] even after adjustment for the journal’s impact factor. Our findings may influence decisions of editors and authors regarding brief reports.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ball, P. (2008). A longer paper gathers more citations. Nature, 455, 274–275.
Falagas, M. E., & Alexiou, V. G. (2008). The top-ten in journal impact factor manipulation. Archivum immunolgiae et therapiae experimentalis, 56, 223–226.
Joseph, K. S., & Hoey, J. (1999). Research letters in CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 160, 825.
Lokker, C., McKibbon, K. A., McKinlay, R. J., Wilczynski, N. L., & Haynes, R. B. (2008). Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study. British Medical Journal, 336, 655–657.
Magalhaes, P. V. (2010). Most reports should be brief reports. Academic Medicine, 85, 1104.
McVeigh, M. E., & Mann, S. J. (2009). The journal impact factor denominator: defining citable (counted) items. Journal of the American Medical Association, 302, 1107–1109.
Neill, U. S. (2010). Let’s keep this brief. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 120, 2.
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mavros, M.N., Bardakas, V., Rafailidis, P.I. et al. Comparison of number of citations to full original articles versus brief reports. Scientometrics 94, 203–206 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0752-3
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0752-3