With the global spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, scientists from various disciplines responded quickly to this historical public health emergency. The sudden boom of COVID-19-related papers in a short period of time may bring unexpected influence to some commonly used bibliometric indicators. By a large-scale investigation using Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, this brief communication confirms the citation advantage of COVID-19-related papers empirically through the lens of Essential Science Indicators’ highly cited paper. More than 8% of COVID-19-related papers published during 2020 and 2021 were selected as Essential Science Indicators highly cited papers, which was much higher than the set global benchmark value of 1%. The citation advantage of COVID-19-related papers for different Web of Science categories/countries/journal impact factor quartiles was also demonstrated. The distortions of COVID-19-related papers’ citation advantage to some bibliometric indicators such as journal impact factor were discussed at the end of this brief communication.
ZhaoWZhangLWangJet al. How has academia responded to the urgent needs created by COVID-19? A multi-level global, regional and national analysis. J Inform Sci. Epub ahead of print 13March2022. DOI: 10.1177/01655515221084646.
2.
FassinY. Research on Covid-19: a disruptive phenomenon for bibliometrics. Scientometrics2021; 126(6): 5305–5319.
3.
MalikAAButtNSBashirMAet al. A scientometric analysis on coronaviruses research (1900–2020): time for a continuous, cooperative and global approach. J Infect Public Heal2021; 14(3): 311–319.
4.
PorterALZhangYHuangYet al. Tracking and mining the COVID-19 research literature. Front Res Metr Anal2020; 5: 594060.
5.
SahooSPandeyS. Evaluating research performance of Coronavirus and Covid-19 pandemic using scientometric indicators. Online Inform Rev2020; 44(7): 1443–1461.
6.
SuMXuSWengJ. A bibliometric study of COVID-19 research in Web of Science. Pharmacol Res2021; 169: 105664.
7.
ElseH. How a torrent of COVID science changed research publishing – in seven charts. Nature2020; 588(7839): 553–554.
8.
CaiXFryCVWagnerCS. International collaboration during the COVID-19 crisis: autumn 2020 developments. Scientometrics2021; 126(4): 3683–3692.
9.
GrieneisenMLZhangM. Nanoscience and nanotechnology: evolving definitions and growing footprint on the scientific landscape. Small2011; 7(20): 2836–2839.
10.
Aviv-ReuvenSRosenfeldA. Publication patterns’ changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal and short-term scientometric analysis. Scientometrics2021; 126(8): 6761–6784.
IoannidisJPBendavidESalholz-HillelMet al. Massive covidization of research citations and the citation elite. P Natl Acad Sci USA2022; 119(28): e2204074119.
20.
BrandtMDGhozySAKallmesDFet al. Comparison of citation rates between Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 articles across 24 major scientific journals. PLoS ONE2022; 17(7): e0271071.
21.
ZhangJLiuYShenZ. Covid-related papers contribute 50% on the JIF of high impact medicine journals. J Data Inform Sci2022; 7(4): 1–2.
22.
ZhuJLiuW. A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics2020; 123(1): 321–335.
23.
ColavizzaGCostasRTraagVAet al. A scientometric overview of CORD-19. PLoS ONE2021; 16(1): e0244839.
24.
FryCVCaiXZhangYet al. Consolidation in a crisis: patterns of international collaboration in early COVID-19 research. PLoS ONE2020; 15(7): e0236307.
25.
HookDWPorterSJDrauxHet al. Real-time bibliometrics: dimensions as a resource for analyzing aspects of COVID-19. Front Res Metr Anal2021; 5: 595299.
26.
MalekpourMRAbbasi-KangevariMAzadnajafabadSet al. How the scientific community responded to the COVID-19 pandemic: a subject-level time-trend bibliometric analysis. PLoS ONE2021; 16(9): e0258064.
27.
LiuW. Caveats for the use of Web of Science Core Collection in old literature retrieval and historical bibliometric analysis. Technol Forecast Soc2021; 172: 121023.
28.
LiuW. A matter of time: publication dates in Web of Science Core Collection. Scientometrics2021; 126(1): 849–857.
29.
Chinchilla-RodríguezZSugimotoCRLarivièreV. Follow the leader: on the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations. PLoS ONE2019; 14(6): e0218309.
30.
GingrasYKhelfaouiM. Assessing the effect of the United States’‘citation advantage’ on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database. Scientometrics2018; 114(2): 517–532.
31.
LeydesdorffLWagnerCSBornmannL. The European Union, China, and the United States in the top-1% and top-10% layers of most-frequently cited publications: competition and collaborations. J Informetr2014; 8(3): 606–617.
32.
TangL. Does ‘birds of a feather flock together’ matter – evidence from a longitudinal study on US–China scientific collaboration. J Informetr2013; 7(2): 330–344.
WagnerCSZhangLLeydesdorffL. A discussion of measuring the top-1% most-highly cited publications: quality and impact of Chinese papers. Scientometrics2022; 127(4): 1825–1839.
35.
ZhuJLiuW. Comparing like with like: China ranks first in SCI-indexed research articles since 2018. Scientometrics2020; 124(2): 1691–1700.
36.
WagnerCSCaiXZhangYet al. One-year in: COVID-19 research at the international level in CORD-19 data. PLoS ONE2022; 17(5): e0261624.
37.
TraagVA. Inferring the causal effect of journals on citations. Quant Sci Stud2021; 2(2): 496–504.
38.
LiuFHuGTangLet al. The penalty of containing more non-English articles. Scientometrics2018; 114(1): 359–366.
39.
MasonSSinghL. When a journal is both at the ‘top’ and the ‘bottom’: the illogicality of conflating citation-based metrics with quality. Scientometrics2022; 127(6): 3683–3694.
40.
LiuWHuGGuM. The probability of publishing in first-quartile journals. Scientometrics2016; 106(3): 1273–1276.
41.
LiuFGuoWZuoC. High impact factor journals have more publications than expected. Curr Sci2018; 114(5): 955–956.
42.
ZhangLZhaoWSunBet al. How scientific research reacts to international public health emergencies: a global analysis of response patterns. Scientometrics2020; 124(1): 747–773.
43.
LeiLSunY. Should highly cited items be excluded in impact factor calculation? The effect of review articles on journal impact factor. Scientometrics2020; 122(3): 1697–1706.
44.
LiuWLiuFZuoCet al. The effect of publishing a highly cited paper on a journal’s impact factor: a case study of the Review of Particle Physics. Learn Publ2018; 31(3): 261–266.
45.
HicksDWoutersPWaltmanLet al. Bibliometrics: the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature2015; 520(7548): 429–431.
46.
LiangLRousseauRZhongZ. (2013). Non-English journals and papers in physics and chemistry: Bias in citations?. Scientometrics, 95, 333–350.
47.
LiuW. (2017). The changing role of non-English papers in scholarly communication: Evidence from Web of Science's three journal citation indexes. Learned Publishing, 30(2), 115–123.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
