Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the changes in impact factors of otorhinolaryngology journals over the past 15 years. METHOD: Using the online edition of Journal Citation Reports, standard (2-year) and 5-year impact factors were calculated for the leading 15 journals. RESULTS: The results were compared with the impact factors for 1998. The average standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor increased by 2.72 and 2.05 fold respectively when compared with 1998. The average 2012 standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor were 1.82 and 1.99 respectively, reflecting a 9.3 per cent difference. The average 1998 standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor were 0.67 and 0.97 respectively, reflecting a 44.8 per cent difference. The Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology had the highest standard and five-year impact factors. CONCLUSION: These data may indicate changing clinical and research interests within our field, as well as increased speed and ease with which the internet has allowed citation. As a result, five-year intervals may no longer be necessary to adequately gauge journal impact.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coelho et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: