Transitioning from a conventional to a 'mega' journal: A bibliometric case study of the journal Medicine

Simon Wakeling, Peter Willett, Claire Creaser, Jenny Fry, Stephen Pinfield, Valerie Spezi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)
1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Open-Access Mega-Journals (OAMJs) are a relatively new and increasingly important publishing phenomenon. The journal Medicine is in the unique position of having transitioned in 2014 from being a 'traditional' highly-selective journal to the OAMJ model. This study compares the bibliometric profile of the journal Medicine before and after its transition to the OAMJ model. Three standard modes of bibliometric analysis are employed, based on data from Web of Science: journal output volume, author characteristics, and citation analysis. The journal's article output is seen to have grown hugely since its conversion to an OAMJ, a rise driven in large part by authors from China. Articles published since 2015 have fewer citations, and are cited by lower impact journals than articles published before the OAMJ transition. The adoption of the OAMJ model has completely changed the bibliometric profile of the journal, raising questions about the impact of OAMJ peer-review practices. In many respects, the post-2014 version of Medicine is best viewed as a new journal rather than a continuation of the original title.

Original languageEnglish
Article number7
Pages (from-to)1-11
Number of pages11
JournalPublications
Volume5
Issue number2
Early online date06 Apr 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01 Jun 2017

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Transitioning from a conventional to a 'mega' journal: A bibliometric case study of the journal Medicine'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this