The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fortnightly Review: How can impact factors be improved?
Open accessAbstract
Impact factors are widely used to rank and evaluate journals. They are also often used inappropriately as surrogates in evaluation exercises. The inventor of the Science Citation Index warns against the indiscriminate use of these data. Fourteen year cumulative impact data for 10 leading medical journals provide a quantitative indicator of their long term influence. In the final analysis, impact simply reflects the ability of journals and editors to attract the best papers available.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- 10.1126/science.66.1713.385 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.122.3159.108 · DOI · Paper page
- Garfield, 1986, Which medical journals have the greatest impact?, Ann Intern Med, 105, 313, 10.7326/0003-4819-105-2-313 · DOI · Paper page
- Garfield E . Why are the impacts of the leading medical journals so similar and yet so different? Item-by-item audits reveal a diversity of editorial material. Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1987:7–13.
- Fleischmann, 1989, Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium., Journal of Electroanalysis Chemistry Interface, 261, 301, 10.1016/0022-0728(89)80006-3 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0140-6736(93)93096-J · DOI · Paper page
- Marshall, 1984, Unidentified curved bacilli in the stomach of patients with gastritis and peptic ulceration., Lancet, i, 1311, 10.1016/S0140-6736(84)91816-6 · DOI · Paper page
- Lowry, 1951, Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent., Journal of Biological Chemistry, 193, 265, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6 · DOI · Paper page
- Van Trigt, 1995, Setting the agenda: does the medical literature set the agenda for articles about medicines in the newspapers?, Soc Sci Med, 41, 893, 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00389-B · DOI
- Garfield E . How ISI selects journals for coverage: quantitative and qualitative considerations. Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1990:185–93.
- Lock, 1990, “Journalology”: are the quotes needed?, 13, 19
- Garfield E . How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluations, and when is it relevant? Parts 1 and 2. In: Essays of an information scientist. Vol 6. Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1984:354–72.
Cited by
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators
Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007 · Cited by 1,356
Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20677 · Cited by 974
Callaham, M. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2847 · Cited by 644
Measuring Contextual Citation Impact of Scientific Journals
Moed, H. F. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002 · Cited by 628
Bibliometrics: Tracking Research Impact by Selecting the Appropriate Metrics
Agarwal, A., Durairajanayagam, D., Tatagari, S., Esteves, S., Harlev, A., Henkel, R., Roychoudhury, S., Homa, S., Puchalt, N., Ramasamy, R., et al. (2016) · Asian Journal of Andrology · doi:10.4103/1008-682x.171582 · Cited by 639
Metadata
- Authors
- Garfield, E.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1996-08-17
- Volume
- 313
- Issue
- 7054
- Pages
- 411-413
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W17751427
- Cited by
- 484
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fortnightly Review: How can impact factors be improved? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.313.7054.411
- The paper
- Garfield, E. (1996). Fortnightly Review: How can impact factors be improved? BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7054.411
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
