Fostering diffusion of scientific contents of National Society Cardiovascular Journals: the new ESC search engine

Open access

Summary

European Society of Cardiology (ESC) National Society Cardiovascular Journals (NSCJs) are high-quality biomedical journals focused on cardiovascular diseases. The Editors’ Network of the ESC devises editorial initiatives aimed at improving the scientific quality and diffusion of NSCJ. In this article we will discuss on the importance of the Internet, electronic editions and open access strategies on scientific publishing. Finally, we will propose a new editorial initiative based on a novel electronic tool on the ESC web-page that may further help to increase the dissemination of contents and visibility of NSCJs

Keywords:
References
  • [1] Alfonso F, Ambrosio G, Pinto FJ et al. European National Society cardiovascular journals. Background, rationale and mission statement of the “Editors’ Club” (Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology). Heart 2008; 94:e19.

  • [2] Alfonso F, Ambrosio G, Pinto FJ et al. Editors’ Network ESC Task Force. European Society of Cardiology national cardiovascular journals: the ‘editors’ network’. Eur Heart J 2010; 31:26-8.

  • [3] Alfonso F, Timmis A, Pinto FJ et al. Editors’ Network European Society of Cardiology Task Force. Conflict of interest policies and disclosure requirements among European Society of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Journals.Eur Heart J 2012; 33:587-94.

  • [4] Mills P, Timmis A, Huber K et al. The role of European national journals in education. Heart 2009; 95:e3.

  • [5] Timmis AD, Alfonso F, Ambrosio G et al. Editors’ Network.National society cardiovascular journals of Europe: Almanac 2011. Heart 2011; 97:1819.

  • [6] Alfonso F, Bermejo J, Segovia J. Impactology, impactitis, impactotherapy. Rev Esp Cardiol 2005; 58:1239-45.

  • [7] Bjork B-C, Welling P, Laakso M et al. Open access to the scientific journal literature: situation 2009. PLoS ONE 2010; 5:e11273.

  • [8] Van Aalst J. Using Google Scholar to estimate the impact of journal articles in education. Educational Researcher 2010; 39:387-400.

  • [9] Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA et al. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J 2008; 22:338-42.

  • [10] Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I et al. Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA 2009; 302:1092-6.

  • [11] Alfonso F. The long pilgrimage of Spanish biomedical journals toward excellence. Who helps? Quality, impact and research merit. Endocrinol Nutr 2010; 57:110-20.

  • [12] Merton RK. The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered.Science 1968; 159:56-63.

  • [13] Brody T, Harnad S, Carr L. Earlier Web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 2006; 57:1060-72.14.

  • [14] Perneger TV. Relation between online ‘hit counts’ and subsequent citations: prospective study of research papers in the BMJ. BMJ 2004; 329:546-7.

  • [15] Wren JD. URL decay in MEDLINE: a 4-year follow-up study. Bioinformatics 2008; 24:1381-5.

  • [16] Butler D. Web usage data outline map of knowledge. Nature 2009; 458:135.

  • [17] Citrome L, Moss SV, Graf C. How to search and harvest the medical literature: let the citations come to you, and how to proceed when they do. Int J Clin Pract 2009; 63:1565-70.

  • [18] Hrynaszkiewicz I, Norton ML, Vickers AJ et al. Preparing raw clinical data for publication: guidance for journal editors, authors and peer reviwers. BMJ 2010; 340:c181.

  • [19] Ross JS, Lehman R, Gross CP. The importance of clinical trial data sharing. Towards more open science. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2012; 5:238-40.

  • [20] Piwowar HA, Day RS, Fridsma DB. Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate. PLoS ONE 2007; 2:e308.

  • [21] Santoro E, Caldarola P, Villella A. Using Web 2.0 technologies and social media for the cardiologist’s education and update. G Ital Cardiol (Rome) 2011; 12:174-81.

  • [22] Chatterjee P, Biswas T. Blogs and Twitter in medical publications: too unreliable to quote, or a change waiting to happen? S AfrMed J 2011; 101:712, 714.

  • [23] Chan XH, Wynn-Jones W. Time for open access secure online data collection tool. BMJ 2012; 11:49.

  • [24] Masic I, Sivic S, Pandza H. Social Networks in medical education in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mater Sociomed 2012; 24:162-4.

  • [25] Nallamothu BK, Lüscher TF. Moving from impact to influence: measurement and the changing role of medical journals. Eur Heart J 2012; 33:2892-6.

  • [26] Heras M, Avanzas P, Bayes-Genis A et al. 2011 Annual summary. Another meeting with our readers. Rev Esp Cardiol 2011; 64:1207-14.

  • [27] Meneghini R, Packer AL. Is there science beyond English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down language barriers in scientific communication. EMBO Rep 2007; 8:112-16.

  • [28] Carroll MW. Why full open access matters. PLoS Biol 2011; 9:e101210.

  • [29] Bjork BC. A study of innovative features in scholarly open access journals. J Med Internet Res 2011; 13:e115.

  • [30] Alfonso F, Almonte K, Arai K et al. Ibero-American cardiovascular journals. Proposals for a much-needed cooperation.Rev Esp Cardiol 2009; 62:1060-7.

  • [31] Suber P. Ensuring open access for publicly funded research.BMJ 2012; 345:e5184.

  • [32] Whitfield J. Open access comes of age. Nature 2011; 474:428.

  • [33] Eysenbach G. Citation advantage of open access articles.PLoS Biol 2006; 4:e157.

  • [34] Norris M, Oppenheim C, Rowland F. The citation advantage of open-access articles. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 2008; 59:1963-72.

  • [35] Evans JE, Reimer J. Open access and global participation in science. Science 2009; 323:1025.

  • [36] Mueller PS, Murali NS, Cha SS et al. The effect of online status on the impact factors of general internal medicine journals. Neth J Med 2006; 64:39-44.

  • [37] Murali NS, Murali HR, Auethavekiat P et al. Impact of FUTON and NAA bias on visibility of research. Mayo Clin Proc 2004; 79:1001-6.

  • [38] Gargouri Y, Hajjem C, Larivière V et al. Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS ONE 2010; 5:e13636.

  • [39] Davis PM. Open access, readership, citations: a randomized controlled trial of scientific journal publishing.FASEB J 2011; 25:2129-34.

  • [40] Crum JA. An availability study of electronic articles in an academic health sciences library. J Med Libr Assoc 2011; 99:290-6.

  • [41] Manikandan S, Vani NI. Restricting access to publications from funded research: ethical issues and solutions. J Postgrad Med 2010; 56:154-6.

  • [42] Hawkes N. UK government comes down in favor of making all publicly funded research “open access”. BMJ 2012; 345:e4878.

  • [43] Noorden RV. Europe joins UK open-access bid. Britain plans to dip in to research funding to pay for results to be freely available. Nature 2012; 487:285.

  • [44] http://www.escardio.org/about/corporate-news/Pages/Search-the-ESC.aspx

  • [45] http://www.escardio.org/about/welcome/Pages/Search-the-ESC.aspx

  • [46] ESC Web activity report Oct 2012 to Nov 2012. http://snack.to/fukiqkmc

Seminars in Cardiovascular Medicine

The Journal of Lithuanian Heart Association

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 24 24 18
PDF Downloads 3 3 2