27 Oct The impact factor for medical and scientific journals has other journal ratings systems have been proposed, each Isubstantial importance in academics.

View in Publisher’s site PDF Page 1 / 2 v + Q Radiology COMMUNICATIONS . FROM THE EDITOR Download [g] Details Radiology and the Impact Factor David A. Bluemke, MD, PhD Radiology M Radiology 2022: 000:1-2 . hups//doi.org/10.1148/radiol.229016 . @ RSNA. 2022 The impact factor for medical and scientific journals has other journal ratings systems have been proposed, each Isubstantial importance in academics. Journal impact fac- with its strengths and weaknesses (1). Radiology tors are strongly considered by authors when determining Limitations aside, what is the meaning of Radiology’s high where to submit their research studies. Forty percent of re- impact factor? The impact factor for this journal is ranked search-intensive institutions in the United States and Canada number one of 136 medical journals classified by Clarivate RECENTLY PUBLISHED consider publication in journals with high impact factor for in the category "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical promotion and tenure of scientists (1). Researchers applying Imaging." For comparison, the number two ranked journal for grants from the National Institutes of Health understand in our category has an impact factor of 16.1. The scope of that a few publications in the highest-ranked journals will Radiology is very broad, publishing leading-edge research in improve their likelihood to obtain research funding. all facets of radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imag- The impact factor of a journal is calculated as a ratio of ing. This wide coverage of the field should naturally lead to two numbers. The numerator of the impact factor is the a higher impact factor. A journal that has more focus, for number of citations to articles published in each journal over example, publishing only articles on cardiovascular MRI, a preceding 2-year period. The denominator is the number might have a smaller readership and thus a lower impact of original research and review articles published over the factor. Thus, many of the 136 journals in the Radiology, same 2 years. The inventor of the impact factor was Eugene Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging category are sub- Garfield, who had worked at the Welch Medical Library at specialized and not directly comparable. ARTICLE Johns Hopkins University. Contrary to the issues of promo- A frustration of nearly every journal editor is that impact tion and research funding mentioned above, Garfield’s jour- factors do not seem to reflect the multiple different roles of Radiology and the Impact Factor nal impact factor was intended to advise librarians regarding the editor. "The numbers look backward (what already hap- which journals to purchase. More journal citations per pub- pened) instead of toward new changes. Impact factors are lished article indicated more scientific interest and perhaps a public report card. Boards of directors who appoint edi- David A. Bluemke more importance of a journal in its field (1). tors may not emphasize the impact factor, but those same Today, the impact factor is published annually by the boards are disappointed if the impact factor decreases. And company Clarivate in an online publication called Journal despite much effort, impact factors are relatively static, and "9 CITE Citation Reports. Impact factors are released in June fol- very hard to change. Impact factors are self-perpetuating and lowing the year in question; thus, in June 2022, Clarivate self-reinforcing: journals with high impact factors tend to releases its 2021 impact factor results. The midyear release have high impact factors each year and vice versa. The many 2022 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. presumably allows time for Clarivate to provide simulta disadvantages (and advantages) of the journal impact factor neous publication of impact factors for more than 21 000 have been thoroughly reviewed (1,3), yet this single number ? https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.229016 medical and scientific journals. stubbornly persists in the thinking of most researchers. Now, back to our journal. The impact factor for Still, the majority of journal editors and boards receive

View in Publisher’s site PDF Page 1 / 2 v O + + number of citations to articles published in each journal over example, publishing only articles on cardiovascular MRI, a preceding 2-year period. The denominator is the number might have a smaller readership and thus a lower impact << of original research and review articles published over the factor. Thus, many of the 136 journals in the Radiology, Download [g] Details same 2 years. The inventor of the impact factor was Eugene Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging category are sub- Garfield, who had worked at the Welch Medical Library at specialized and not directly comparable. Johns Hopkins University. Contrary to the issues of promo- A frustration of nearly every journal editor is that impact tion and research funding mentioned above, Garfield’s jour- factors do not seem to reflect the multiple different roles of nal impact factor was intended to advise librarians regarding the editor. The numbers look backward (what already hap- which journals to purchase. More journal citations per pub- pened) instead of toward new changes. Impact factors are Radiology M lished article indicated more scientific interest and perhaps a public report card. Boards of directors who appoint edi- more importance of a journal in its field (1). tors may not emphasize the impact factor, but those same Today, the impact factor is published annually by the boards are disappointed if the impact factor decreases. And company Clarivate in an online publication called Journal despite much effort, impact factors are relatively static, and Citation Reports. Impact factors are released in June fol- very hard to change. Impact factors are self-perpetuating and Radiology lowing the year in question; thus, in June 2022, Clarivate self-reinforcing: journals with high impact factors tend to releases its 2021 impact factor results. The midyear release have high impact factors each year and vice versa. The many presumably allows time for Clarivate to provide simultan disadvantages (and advantages) of the journal impact factor RECENTLY PUBLISHED neous publication of impact factors for more than 21 000 have been thoroughly reviewed (1,3), yet this single number medical and scientific journals. stubbornly persists in the thinking of most researchers. Now, back to our journal. The impact factor for Still, the majority of journal editors and boards receive Radiology continues to increase. The 2021 impact factor the good news each year of an increasing impact factor. But for Radiology is 29.1. The 2021 impact factor reflects ar- how can most journals see a yearly increase? This sounds ticles published in 2019 and 2020. In 2020, our impact like Lake Wobegon, where all journals are above average. factor was 1 1.1. In the 10 years prior to 2020, the impact Small but consistent increases are understood by observ- factor for Radiology steadily increased from about 6 to 8, ing that the number of published articles increases each stubbornly remaining in the single digits. These recent in- year. More publications result in increased opportunity for creases in impact factor have their foundation in the sub- journal citations. The yearly inflation factor for the impact stantial and highly cited research work of dozens of authors factor has been estimated at about 5% (4). who have been published in the journal Radiology. That is, until the pandemic occurred. When Radiology ARTICLE The impact factor calculation (an arithmetic mean) and other journals tweeted the news about rising impact would suggest that articles published in 2019 and 2020 factors, a few responses were, "It’s just due to COVID-19." Radiology and the Impact Factor were cited by other publications an average of 29 times. Just indeed. The COVID-19 pandemic has been the most However, that simplistic interpretation is misleading. important medical crisis of the last 100 years. The full force This is because the distribution of highly cited articles is of medical science was applied to investigating all facets of David A. Bluemke very skewed (1). A relatively small number of articles re- SARS-CoV-2 infection, from cellular and molecular biol- ceive the bulk of citations, while some fraction of articles ogy to diagnosis and treatment. More than 200 000 pre- receives no citations. For example, the Radiology publi- prints related to COVID-19 were released in 2020 alone "9 CITE cation entitled "Correlation of Chest CT and RT-PCR (5). During the pandemic, the number of publications in Testing for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in PubMed increased by 1 1% and 14% in 2020 and 2021, China: A Report of 1014 Cases" by Ai et al (2) received respectively (6). The COVID-19 pandemic changed all 2022 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. 1318 citations-far more than the average of 29. Multiple facets of life. We would demand that a metric that ranks ? https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.229016 This copy is for personal use only. To order printed copies, contact [email protected]

View in Publisher’s site PDF Page 2 / 2 v + + Radiology and the Impact Factor << Download [g] Details 120 Highest 2021 Impact Factors for 20 Clinical Medicine Specialties* 100 (*excluding general medicine) 8 Radiology M 2021 Impact Factor 8 RADIOLOGY, 29 Radiology RECENTLY PUBLISHED Pulmonary Psychiatry Neurology Oncology Endocrinology RADIOLOGY Urology Surgery nfectious disease Cardiovascular Pediatric Gastroenterology Hematology Pathology Dermatology Obstetrics Emergency Med Orthopedic surgery Rehab Medicine Medical Specialty Bar graph shows that the impact factor of 29.1 places Radiology solidly within the middle third of medical specialties. the most important medical and scientific research output must diagnosis for our field. This journal has about 1000 reviewers also reflect these pandemic-era realities (7). who also donate their time to the peer review process. Our Radiology and other leading medical journals were markedly editorial board has evolved to become an efficient and effective affected by accelerated research during the COVID-19 pan- group, sifting through and arbitrating thousands of outstanding ARTICLE demic. I evaluated the change in impact factor for seven journals research articles per year. During the pandemic in particular, the with similar mission and scope to that of Radiology. All had a sig- Publications Department at RSNA also rose to the occasion with Radiology and the Impact Factor nificant "COVID bump" in impact factor, ranging from a 15% an emphasis on rapid, accurate, and high-quality publishing. to 30% increase. This was much higher than the average annual Our societal passion for ranking and metrics is higher than inflation factor for impact factor (about 5%, as mentioned pre- ever. I am certainly part of this trend-it seems impossible for viously). Yet, the COVID bump for Radiology was much higher David A. Bluemke me to purchase the smallest item from Amazon without por- than that of any other radiologic journal, an approximately ing over rankings and reviews. I check rankings for every movie 160% increase (29.1 this year vs 1 1.1 in 2020). It seems reason- I watch. Many of us choose restaurants, places to get our cars "9 CITE able to conclude that many authors turned to Radiology as the serviced, and even colleges for our children based on rankings. authoritative publication of choice for top research in the field. Journal rankings and impact factors are no better or worse in The field of radiology is only one of approximately 20 medical this regard. If understood and used appropriately, the data they 2022 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. specialties. I also evaluated the COVID bump in each specialty reveal provide a self-assessment both for journal editors and their by comparing the 2021 impact factor to the prior 2020 impact sponsoring societies. Journal rankings are certainly here to stay. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.229016 factor for the leading journal in each specialty (excluding jour- ? nals that publish only review articles). I excluded general medical References ournals (ep. New England Journal of Medicine

how would you write a three-paragraph report summary on this article?