The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 85:2449-2454 (2003)
© 2003 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Understanding the Limitations of the Journal Impact Factor
Andrew P. Kurmis, PhD1
1 Orthopaedic Research Unit, Repatriation General Hospital, Daws Road, Daw Park,
South Australia 5041, Australia. E-mail address:
andrew.kurmis{at}flinders.edu.au
Investigation performed at the Orthopaedic Research Unit, Repatriation
General Hospital, South Australia, Australia
The author did not receive grants or outside funding in support of his
research or preparation of this manuscript. He did not receive payments or
other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a
commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or
direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational
institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the
author is affiliated or associated.
The impact factor, a simple mathematical formula reflecting the number of
citations of a journal's material divided by the number of citable materials
published by that same journal, has evolved to become one of the most
influential tools in modern research and academia.
The impact factor can be influenced and biased (intentionally or otherwise)
by many factors.
Extension of the impact factor to the assessment of journal quality or
individual authors is inappropriate.
Extension of the impact factor to cross-discipline journal comparison is
also inappropriate.
Those who choose to use the impact factor as a comparative tool should be
aware of the nature and premise of its derivation and also of its inherent
flaws and practical limitations.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Facebook Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Jackson
The impact factor game: the rising impact factor of the British Journal of Radiology - a success story?
Br. J. Radiol.,
February 1, 2010;
83(986):
93 - 98.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Lameire
Editorial Note
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant.,
January 1, 2008;
23(1):
1 - 3.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. L. van Driel, M. Maier, and J. D. Maeseneer
Measuring the impact of family medicine research: scientific citations or societal impact?
Fam. Pract.,
October 1, 2007;
24(5):
401 - 402.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. H. Bosker and C. C. P. M. Verheyen
The international rank order of publications in major clinical orthopaedic journals from 2000 to 2004
J Bone Joint Surg Br,
February 1, 2006;
88-B(2):
156 - 158.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Hakkalamani, A. Rawal, M. S. Hennessy, and R. W. Parkinson
The impact factor of seven orthopaedic journals: FACTORS INFLUENCING IT
J Bone Joint Surg Br,
February 1, 2006;
88-B(2):
159 - 162.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. T. Obremskey, N. Pappas, E. Attallah-Wasif, P. Tornetta III, and M. Bhandari
Level of Evidence in Orthopaedic Journals
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
December 1, 2005;
87(12):
2632 - 2638.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. S. Murali, H. R. Murali, P. Auethavekiat, P. J. Erwin, J. N. Mandrekar, N. J. Manek, and A. K. Ghosh
Impact of FUTON and NAA Bias on Visibility of Research
Mayo Clin. Proc.,
August 1, 2004;
79(8):
1001 - 1006.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|