|
|
|
| Exploring the Clinical Impact Predictors of Papers— Based on the Empirical Analysis of Publications from Nobel Prize Winners in Physiology or Medicine |
| Chen Sisi, Liu Chunli |
| Library of China Medical University, Shenyang 110122 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Under the context of major public health emergencies, the clinical application value of scientific papers is being given importance. However, the evaluation this type of influence and the indicators of effectiveness still need to be explored. The Citation Laureate is a method used in predicting the winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine based on the frequency of citations. The reason why the Nobel Prize was finally won without its prediction may be because the traditional citation indicators cannot detect the potential clinical impact of the study. This study introduces the Approximate Potential to Translate scores (APT) proposed by NIH in the United States, uses Nobel Prize winners in Physiology or Medicine as the sample, and compares between research collections by predicted authors and unpredicted authors. Seven indicators: Total Citations, Weighted RCR, Cited By Clin, Avg. APT, Avg. Human, Avg. Animal, and Avg. Mol/Cell are determined and their differences are evaluated using the translation triangle model, and correlations between those indicators are identified. Total Citations, Weighted RCR, and Avg. Mol/Cell significantly differ between predicted and unpredicted papers. The mean and median values of Avg. Human and Avg. Animal of the unpredicted group are higher than those of the predicted group. From the perspective of the triangle model, the molecular/cell characteristics of the predicted group are highlighted, whereas Avg. Human and Avg. Animal indicators of the unpredicted group are more obvious. The results of correlation analysis show that Avg. Mol/Cell is significantly positively correlated with Total Citations, while Avg. Animal is significantly negatively correlated with Total Citations, and Avg. Human is not significantly correlated with Total Citations. The number of citations used in the Citation Laureate Award cannot evaluate or predict the impact of clinical translation, and is more sensitive to the measurement of the impact of basic research on molecular and cell biology; however, it lacks sensitivity to the impact of animal experiments and clinical research. The APT score can accurately measure the future clinical translational potential of a paper, therefore its inclusion in the evaluation indicator system of scientific and technological papers should be considered to account for the deficiency of the indicators based solely on citation analysis.
|
|
Received: 11 November 2020
|
|
|
|
1 Fasolo A, Sessa C. Translational research in phase I trials[J]. Clinical and Translational Oncology, 2009, 11(9): 580-588.
2 Contopoulos-Ioannidis D G, Alexiou G A, Gouvias T C, et al. Life cycle of translational research for medical interventions[J]. Science, 2008, 321(5894): 1298-1299.
3 Hanney S R, Castle-Clarke S, Grant J, et al. How long does biomedical research take? Studying the time taken between biomedical and health research and its translation into products, policy, and practice[J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 2015, 13: 1.
4 McNamee L M, Walsh M J, Ledley F D. Timelines of translational science: from technology initiation to FDA approval[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(5): e0177371.
5 Wang D S, Song C M, Barabási A L. Quantifying long-term scientific impact[J]. Science, 2013, 342(6154): 127-132.
6 Weber G M. Identifying translational science within the triangle of biomedicine[J]. Journal of Translational Medicine, 2013, 11: 126.
7 杜建, 唐小利, 张燕舞, 等. 引文网络加速转化医学T1-T2-T3阶段的转化进程[J]. 中华临床营养杂志, 2013, 21(2): 98-102.
8 杜建, 唐小利. 为转化医学研究提供信息支撑——医学图情服务的新方向[J]. 图书情报工作, 2013, 57(20): 62-67.
9 Williams R S, Lotia S, Holloway A K, et al. From scientific discovery to cures: bright stars within a galaxy[J]. Cell, 2015, 163(1): 21-23.
10 Ke Q. Identifying translational science through embeddings of controlled vocabularies[J]. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2019, 26(6): 516-523.
11 Hutchins B I, Davis M T, Meseroll R A, et al. Predicting translational progress in biomedical research[J]. PLoS Biology, 2019, 17(10): e3000416.
12 iCite[EB/OL]. [2020-10-27]. https://icite.od.nih.gov/.
13 Hutchins B I, Yuan X, Anderson J M, et al. Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): a new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level[J]. PLoS Biology, 2016, 14(9): e1002541.
14 Ioannidis J P, Boyack K, Wouters P F. Citation metrics: a primer on how (not) to normalize[J]. PLoS Biology, 2016, 14(9): e1002542.
15 陈斯斯, 刘春丽. 基于共引网络的出版物影响力评价新指标: 相对引用率[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2020, 43(7): 75-80.
16 Nobel success[EB/OL]. [2020-10-27]. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/successful-predictions/.
17 Garfield E. Citation indexes for science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas[J]. Science, 1955, 122(3159): 108-111.
18 王琳, 岳卫平. 基于引文分析的诺贝尔奖级科学家遴选——科睿唯安“引文桂冠奖”详解[J]. 世界科技研究与发展, 2019, 41(5): 447-454.
19 李正红, 李玉玲, 于双成. 我国诺贝尔生理学或医学奖研究的文献分析[J]. 医学与哲学(A), 2017, 38(2): 95-97.
20 章娟, 段志光, 于琦, 等. 中科院院士与诺贝尔生理学或医学奖获得者获奖前SCI论文比较[J]. 医学与哲学(A), 2016, 37(1): 22-26.
21 杜建, 武夷山. 基于被引速率指标识别睡美人文献及其“王子”——以2014年诺贝尔化学奖得主Stefan Hell的睡美人文献为例[J]. 情报学报, 2015, 34(5): 508-521.
22 鲍玉芳, 马建霞. 诺贝尔奖与科学家论文数量、被引频次的相关性——基于2000—2010年诺贝尔化学、物理学获奖者的实证研究[J]. 图书馆理论与实践, 2015(8): 40-45.
23 李江, 姜明利, 李玥婷. 引文曲线的分析框架研究——以诺贝尔奖得主的引文曲线为例[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2014, 40(2): 41-49.
24 The Nobel Prize awarding institutions[EB/OL]. [2020-10-27]. https://www.nobelprize.org/the-nobel-prize-organisation/prize-awarding-institutions/.
25 Nomination and selection of literature laureates[EB/OL]. [2020-10-27]. https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/literature/.
26 屠呦呦, 倪慕云, 钟裕容, 等. 中药青蒿化学成分的研究Ⅰ[J]. 药学学报, 1981, 16(5): 366-370.
27 曾建勋. 破除“SCI至上”需要弘扬“同行评议”[J]. 数字图书馆论坛, 2020(2): 1-2.
28 中国科学技术协会. 高质量科技期刊分级目录总汇[EB/OL]. (2021-11-04) [2021-01-04]. https://www.cast.org.cn/art/2021/11/4/art_43_172464.html.
29 Ioannidis J P A, Boyack K W, Small H, et al. Bibliometrics: is your most cited work your best?[J]. Nature, 2014, 514(7524): 561-562.
30 Ioannidis J P A, Klavans R, Boyack K W. Multiple citation indicators and their composite across scientific disciplines[J]. PLoS Biology, 2016, 14(7): e1002501.
31 Erren T C, Shaw D M, Gro? J V. How to avoid haste and waste in occupational, environmental and public health research[J]. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2015, 69(9): 823-825.
32 Ioannidis J P A, Khoury M J. Assessing value in biomedical research: the PQRST of appraisal and reward[J]. JAMA, 2014, 312(5): 483-484. |
|
|
|
