SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.45 issue3Neutral oral contrast agents for computed tomography enterographyWhich is your diagnosis? author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Radiologia Brasileira

Print version ISSN 0100-3984

Radiol Bras vol.45 no.3 São Paulo May/June 2012

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-39842012000300002 

LETTER TO THE EDITOR CARTA AO EDITOR

 

What can we cite from Radiologia Brasileira?

 

 

Antonio Carlos Pires Carvalho

Associate Professor, Department of Radiology, Associate Coordinator of the Program of Post-graduation in Medicine (Radiology), Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. E-mail: acpcrj@hucff.ufrj.br

 

 

Mr. Editor,

With respect to the recently published editorial(1) , I would like to add further elements in order to emphasize the relevance of citation of articles published in the journal Radiologia Brasileira (RB).

Initially, an analysis must be done on the Journal Citations Report (JCR) of the Web of Science, and on the Cites per Doc (CPD) of SCImago, reminding that the last available assessment of JCR is from 2010; the 2011 assessment has not been completed yet.

Both JCR and CPD refer to a system which evaluates the relevance of scientific journals according to the number of received citations. Initially created by Thomson Reuters, within the Web of Knowledge service, and named impact factor (IF), it is calculated with basis on the frequency with which an article published in the previous two years has been cited in a given year or period. For example: if a journal published 50 articles in 2009, 50 articles in 2010, and obtained 200 citations of those articles in 2011 in the journals indexed at the Web of Knowledge, that journal's IF corresponds to 2. If it obtained 400 citations, its IF would be 4, and if it obtained only 20 citations, the IF would be 0.2. Likewise, CPD was created by Elsevier, a global giant in the editorial sphere, in order to evaluate the publications in its ranking, the SCImago. The system is the same, i.e., the number of citations of articles published in the two years prior to the evaluated year, divided by the number of articles from those two previous years. Equally, SciELO, a database where almost all relevant Brazilian scientific journals are indexed, follows a similar methodology, calculating the IF in the same way.

Such initial analysis of the metrics where the most important scientific journals worldwide are indexed leads us to the following situation: considering that the IF and CPD are referential requirements for Capes in the assessment of post-graduation programs, it is imperative that RB is cited and is given the deserved relevance, since it is the main Radiology journal published in Portuguese, with both printed and online issues. In the Spanish language, there is only one Nuclear Medicine journal and no Radiology journal at JCR. I believe that as our journal starts being cited in international journals, its indexation at JCR will be more easily achieved. And, for this purpose, we need to publish articles in it. And cite its articles, not only in RB, but in other journals as well. Many Brazilian authors regularly publish articles in international journals. Such authors can and should be the main generators of RB citations. Our three Programs of Post-graduation in Radiology (Master and PhD) may improve their appreciation at Capes assessment based on RB publications if it reaches a higher CPD.

Until May 2012, RB received 35 citations in the several journals indexed at SciELO, with only 13 citations for 2010 and 2011 articles being utilized in the calculation of the two-year IF at SciELO (at the moment, IF = 0.0903), a database where RB is indexed. At SCImago, another database in which it is indexed, the CPD (equivalent to IF) is decreasing. It reached 0.379 in 2009, but decreased to 0.218 in 2010 and to 0.085 in 2011. From a total of 173 journals "in the field" at SCImago, we are at the 129th position. In this databank, we had 59 citations in 2008, 86 in 2009 (our best year), 66 in 2010 and only 24 in 2011.

In the next paragraphs, I describe a summary of publications in 2010 and 2011, which may be cited from RB in 2012, with direct influence on the IF at SciELO and on the CPD at SCImago.

In 2010, RB published 88 articles, among them 50 original articles, 10 review articles or iconographic essays, 17 case reports or from the section "which is your diagnosis?" and 11 editorials. In 2011, RB published 90 articles, with 11 editorials, 44 original articles, 14 review articles/iconographic essays and 21 case reports/which is your diagnosis?. Of those, 144 articles in the different areas of knowledge in the radiological universe were counted as citable by SciELO. In 2012, the sum of the citations of articles published in 2010 and 2011, divided by 144, will correspond to the 2012 IF at SciELO.

As the articles are separated according to areas of knowledge, 21 articles refer to abdomen/intestinal tract; 8 to head and neck; 15 to cardiovascular system; 13 articles approach quality control; radioprotection or radiation physics; 14 refer to the urinary system or Gynecology/Obstetrics; 11 refer specifically to the breast; 16 to the musculoskeletal system; 17 to neuroradiology; 10 to themes of Pediatrics; 13 approaching general Radiology; 11, Radiotherapy; 16, chest; and 9 approach other different themes.

As those same articles are separated by imaging method, 26 approach conventional Radiology, 36, ultrasonography (US), 41, computed tomography (CT), 42, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 11, Nuclear Medicine/PET, 11, mammography, 12, Radiotherapy, either isolatedly or combined in a single article.

In other words, we have a wide range of articles to cite in our future publications. It should be highlighted that starting from the September/October 2006 issue, all articles are fully translated into English, and may be cited from their online versions in articles sent for publication in international journals.

Some of the articles published in the two above described years may be frequently cited, since they approach broad and varied themes, reviews, are well illustrated and well written, covering almost all areas of radiological knowledge. In 2010, we had articles approaching diagnostic accuracy in mammography(2,3) , abnormalities in the first gestational trimester(4) , neuro-PET/MRI(5) , MRI in periosteal reactions(6) and CT in emphysema(7) . In 2011, articles on whole-body MRI in children with juvenile lymphoma(8) , US of adnexal masses(9) , musculoskeletal changes in lupus(10) , CT in cranioencephalic trauma(11) , two essays on signs in neuroradiology(12,13) and one about US, approaching interpretation of gallbladder wall thickening(14) . In the biennium, several articles on dosimetry and radioprotection, several others on CT in varied pulmonary changes, Doppler US and mammography were published. In summary, a wide range of citable articles.

Again, let me emphasize(1): it is entirely up to us to make citations on our journal and its articles in order to make RB grow and become more relevant in the academic world putting it among the top cited journals. Professors of Radiology, with special emphasis on those who participate on the stricto sensu Post-graduation Programs (both Master's and PhD), may help in enhancing the growth of RB. I believe that citations of "our" articles in international journals will generate curiosity on the part of foreign authors to know the references and, consequently, RB. And such authors may eventually cite then too. Currently, many Brazilian authors have considerable international influence and thus they can attract attention to our journal. The indexation in JCR with a significant impact factor, can be the consequence and the highlight of such propositions. I do believe this can be achieved.

 

REFERENCES

1. Carvalho ACP. A revista Radiologia Brasileira. Novas possibilidades de crescimento frente às modificações dos critérios da Capes. Radiol Bras. 2012;45(2):v-vi.         [ Links ]

2. Nascimento JHR, Silva VD, Maciel AC. Acurácia dos achados mamográficos do câncer de mama: correlação da classificação BI-RADS e achados histológicos. Radiol Bras. 2010;43:91–6.         [ Links ]

3. Koch HA, Castro MVK. Qualidade da interpretação do diagnóstico mamográfico. Radiol Bras. 2010;43:97–101.         [ Links ]

4. Rios LTM, Oliveira RVB, Martins MG, et al. Anormalidades do primeiro trimestre da gravidez: ensaio iconográfico. Radiol Bras. 2010; 43:125–32.         [ Links ]

5. Cavalcanti Filho JLG, Fonseca LMB, Domingues RC, et al. PET-RM neurológico com FDG-18F: ensaio iconográfico. Radiol Bras. 2010;43:195–201.         [ Links ]

6. Nogueira-Barbosa MH, Sá JL, Trad CS, et al. Ressonância magnética na avaliação das reações periosteais. Radiol Bras. 2010;43:266–71.         [ Links ]

7. Hochhegger B, Marchiori E, Irion KL, et al. Acurácia da mensuração do enfisema pulmonar na tomografia computadorizada: pontos importantes. Radiol Bras. 2010;43:260–5.         [ Links ]

8. Nava D, Oliveira HC, Luisi FA, et al. Aplicação da ressonância magnética de corpo inteiro para o estadiamento e acompanhamento de pacientes com linfoma de Hodgkin na faixa etária infanto-juvenil: comparação entre diferentes sequências. Radiol Bras. 2011;44:29–34.         [ Links ]

9. Andrade Neto F, Palma-Dias R, Costa FS. Ultrassonografia nas massas anexiais: aspectos de imagem. Radiol Bras. 2011;44:59–67.         [ Links ]

10. Ribeiro DS, Araújo Neto C, D'Almeida F, et al. Achados de imagem das alterações musculoesqueléticas associadas ao lúpus eritematoso sistêmico. Radiol Bras. 2011;44:52–8.         [ Links ]

11. Morgado FL, Rossi LA. Correlação entre a escala de coma de Glasgow e os achados de imagem de tomografia computadorizada em pacientes vítimas de traumatismo cranioencefálico. Radiol Bras. 2011;44:35–41.         [ Links ]

12. Gonçalves FG, Barra FR, Matos VL, et al. Sinais em neurorradiologia – Parte 1. Radiol Bras. 2011;44:123–8.         [ Links ]

13. Barra FR, Gonçalves FG, Matos VL, et al. Sinais em neurorradiologia – Parte 2. Radiol Bras. 2011;44:129–33.         [ Links ]

14. Barbosa ABR, Souza LRMF, Pereira RS, et al. Espessamento parietal da vesícula biliar no exame ultrassonográfico: como interpretar? Radiol Bras. 2011;44:381–7.         [ Links ]