Dataset Information

Citation analysis of Minnesota Department of Health official publications and journal articles: a needs assessment for the RN Barr Library.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The paper describes the information needs of a state public health agency, compares needs to its library's collection, and evaluates collection development policy accordingly.

Methods

A citation analysis of journal articles authored by Minnesota Department of Health staff as well as official publications from 2002 to 2004 was conducted. Fifty-six publications fitting the criteria for inclusion in the study were identified using PubMed and library records. Information on each cited reference was recorded, including reference type, relative age of citation, and journal name, if applicable. The library's collection and collection development policies were analyzed in regard to the results.

Results

As expected, journals were the most heavily cited format: 63% (n = 897) of all citations were to journal articles. Most cited materials were between 2 and 5 years old. The 897 journal citations represented 265 different journals. The top 10 cited journals (4% of all titles) accounted for 36% (n = 320) of all citations; 62% (n = 320) of journals were cited only once. Of the total journals cited, the library subscribed to 70% (n = 627).

Discussion

Overall, no large gaps appeared in the RN Barr Library's journal collection. The analysis confirms that the library's collections budget for serials and books reflects the cited use of these materials.

SUBMITTER: Rethlefsen ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1924933 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Bibliometric indicators increasingly affect careers, funding, and reputation of individuals, their institutions and journals themselves. In contrast to author self-citations, little is known about kinetics of journal self-citations. Here we hypothesized that they may show a generalizable pattern within particular research fields or across multiple fields. We thus analyzed self-cites to 60 journals from three research fields (multidisciplinary sciences, parasitology, and information science). We also hypothesized that the kinetics of journal self-citations and citations received from other journals of the same publisher may differ from foreign citations. We analyzed the journals published the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Nature Publishing Group, and Editura Academiei Române. We found that although the kinetics of journal self-cites is generally faster compared to foreign cites, it shows some field-specific characteristics. Particularly in information science journals, the initial increase in a share of journal self-citations during post-publication year 0 was completely absent. Self-promoting journal self-citations of top-tier journals have rather indirect but negligible direct effects on bibliometric indicators, affecting just the immediacy index and marginally increasing the impact factor itself as long as the affected journals are well established in their fields. In contrast, other forms of journal self-citations and citation stacking may severely affect the impact factor, or other citation-based indices. We identified here a network consisting of three Romanian physics journals Proceedings of the Romanian Academy, Series A, Romanian Journal of Physics, and Romanian Reports in Physics, which displayed low to moderate ratio of journal self-citations, but which multiplied recently their impact factors, and were mutually responsible for 55.9%, 64.7% and 63.3% of citations within the impact factor calculation window to the three journals, respectively. They did not receive nearly any network self-cites prior impact factor calculation window, and their network self-cites decreased sharply after the impact factor calculation window. Journal self-citations and citation stacking requires increased attention and elimination from citation indices.