Análisis Bibliométrico de Archivos De BronconeumologíaEvolución de los Indicadores Bibliométricos, Uso y Accesibilidad Estadistica, Redes de Colaboración, Adherencia a Iniciativas de Calidad y Métricas Alternativas

  1. López Padilla, Daniel E.
Dirigée par:
  1. José Ignacio de Granda Orive Directeur
  2. Adolfo Alonso Arroyo Directeur/trice

Université de défendre: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

Fecha de defensa: 06 mars 2020

Jury:
  1. Rodolfo Álvarez Sala Walther President
  2. Julio Ancochea Bermúdez Secrétaire
  3. Victoria Villena Garrido Rapporteur
  4. Rafael Aleixandre Benavent Rapporteur
  5. Luis Puente Maestu Rapporteur

Type: Thèses

Résumé

This doctoral thesis consisted in the bibliometrics analysis of Archivos de Bronconeumología, the leading diffusion mean of respiratory medicine societies of Spain and Latin America. As a remarkable record, the journal was penalized due to its excess of self-citation in 2010 by the Journal Citation Reports, the one in charge of publishing the impact factors of journals year by year, which might have predicted tendencies of indicators throughout time. A comprehensive analysis of the papers published in the journal for 17 years was carried out, including not only the classic bibliometrics indicators such as productivity, consumption, collaboration and repercussion, though also of its collaborative networks, adherence to international quality statements of scientific data communication, and, catching up with modern times, its impact on social media. The main results of the study are summarized as follows: productivity increase secondary to editorial material increment; a growing internationalization; a higher number of scientific fields participating; a faster acceptance time, although, a longer publication frame of time; a feminization of authorships, though insufficient in terms of coordinating positions; a greater and faster repercussion; a significative increment of quality in scientific data communication, accompanied by higher impact; and a altmetrics impact above the average. In conclusion, the journal developed greatly in the majority of analyzed areas, though there is still room for improvement