Skip to main content
Log in

The classification of biomedical journals by research level

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A new method of classification of biomedical research journals by research level (RL) into clinical or basic, or somewhere in between, is described that updates the system developed by CHI Research Inc. nearly 30 years ago. It is based on counting articles that have one of about 100 “clinical” title words, or one of a similar number of “basic” title words, or both. It allows over 3000 journals in the Science Citation Index (or other databases) to be classified rapidly and transparently, for changes in their research level with time, and for many individual papers in “mixed” journals to be categorised as clinical or basic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Dawson, G., Lucocq, B., Cottrell, R., Lewison, G. (1998), Mapping the Landscape: National Biomedical Research Outputs 1988–95. London: The Wellcome Trust, Policy Report no 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bruin, R. H., Moed, H. F. (1993), Delimitation of scientific subfields using cognitive words from corporate addresses in scientific publications, Scientometrics, 40: 423-436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewison, G. (1996), The definition of biomedical research subfields with title keywords and application to the analysis of research outputs, Research Evaluation, 6(2): 25-36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewison, G., Dawson, G. (1998), The effects of funding on the outputs of biomedical research, Scientometrics, 41: 17-27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewison, G. (1999), The definition and calibration of biomedical subfields, Scientometrics, 46: 529-537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewison, G., Devey, M. E. (1999), Bibliometric methods for the evaluation of arthritis research, Rheumatology, 38: 13-20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshakova-Shaikevich, I. (1996), The standard impact factor as an evaluation tool of science fields and scientific journals, Scientometrics, 35: 283-290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F., Pinski, G., Gee, H. H. (1976), Structure of the biomedical literature, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27: 25-45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F., Hamilton K. S. (1996), Bibliometric performance measures, Scientometrics, 36: 293-310. See p. 300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S., Lopez Hellin, J. (1996), Measuring the impact of scientific publications — the case of the biomedical sciences, Scientometrics, 35: 119-132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Hooydonk, G., Gevaert, H., Milis-Proost, G., van de Sompel, H., Debackere, K. (1994), A bibliotheconomic analysis of the impact factors of scientific disciplines, Scientometrics, 30: 65-81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lewison, G., Paraje, G. The classification of biomedical journals by research level. Scientometrics 60, 145–157 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027677.79173.b8

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027677.79173.b8

Keywords

Navigation