4.6 Article

Bibliometric analysis of six nursing journals from the Web of Science, 2012-2017

期刊

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING
卷 75, 期 3, 页码 543-554

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jan.13868

关键词

bibliometric analysis; citation analysis; nursing; Science Citation Index; scientific production; Web of Science

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim The purpose of this study was to perform a bibliometric analysis of the six most important nursing journals according to the impact factor of the Science Citation Index through Web of Science((R)). The following journals were included: International Journal of Nursing Studies, Nurse Education Today, Journal of Nursing Scholarship, Nursing Outlook, Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing and the Journal of Advanced Nursing. Background In the nursing field, bibliometric analysis and maps have been used to analyse the production of some journals but not for the comparison of different journals. Design/Method Using descriptive bibliometrics, we studied scientific production of different journals and bibliometric maps were used to visualize the content of published articles. Results The six journals included showed that 3,937 articles were written by 1,1371 authors from 2,980 institutions and 84 countries from 2012 - 2017. Journal of Advanced Nursing had a greater number of publications and citations. The most prolific authors showed a tendency to publish first in Journal of Advanced Nursing and then in International Journal of Nursing Studies and Nurse Education Today. The frequency of citation was higher in International Journal of Nursing Studies followed by Journal of Advanced Nursing. The most collaborative authors and those with the most co-citations published more than half of their publications in Journal of Advanced Nursing. The topics most commonly researched by these authors were job satisfaction, collaborative practices, and nurse leaders. Conclusion This bibliometric analysis contributes to the understanding of the current state of nursing research and its evolution.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据