Bone Research
Trend · Prediction · Ranking אימפקט פקטור - אָנָלִיזָה, מְגַמָה, דירוג, נְבוּאָה


חָדָשׁ

אימפקט פקטור

2019-2020

11.508

-9.7 %

אימפקט פקטור Trend

Related Journals

Popular Journals

Bone Research

The 2019-2020 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 11.508, which is just updated in 2020.

Bone Research Impact Factor
Highest IF
12.745
Highest אימפקט פקטור

The highest אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 12.745.

Lowest IF
1.31
Lowest אימפקט פקטור

The lowest אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 1.31.

Total Growth Rate
778.5%
IF Total Growth Rate

The total growth rate of Bone Research IF is 778.5%.

Annual Growth Rate
129.8%
IF Annual Growth Rate

The annual growth rate of Bone Research IF is 129.8%.

אימפקט פקטור Ranking

Subcategory Quartile Rank Percentile
Physiology Q1 6/172

Physiology 96%

Histology Q1 1/60

Histology 99%

Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism Q1 4/217

Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism 98%

אימפקט פקטור Ranking

· In the Physiology research field, the Quartile of Bone Research is Q1. Bone Research has been ranked #6 over 172 related journals in the Physiology research category. The ranking percentile of Bone Research is around 96% in the field of Physiology.
· In the Histology research field, the Quartile of Bone Research is Q1. Bone Research has been ranked #1 over 60 related journals in the Histology research category. The ranking percentile of Bone Research is around 99% in the field of Histology.
· In the Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism research field, the Quartile of Bone Research is Q1. Bone Research has been ranked #4 over 217 related journals in the Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism research category. The ranking percentile of Bone Research is around 98% in the field of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism.

Bone Research Impact Factor 2020-2021 Prediction

Bone Research Impact Factor Predition System

Bone Research Impact Factor Prediction System is now online. You can start share your valuable insights with the community.

Predict Check All Preditions
Total Publications
250
Total Citations
8984

Annual Publication Volume

Annual Citation Record

International Collaboration Trend

Cited Documents Trend

אימפקט פקטור History

Year אימפקט פקטור
Year אימפקט פקטור
2019-2020 11.508
2018-2019 12.745
2017-2018 12.354
2016-2017 9.326
2015-2016 3.549
2014-2015 1.31
2013-2014 -
2012-2013 -
2011-2012 -
אימפקט פקטור History

· The 2019-2020 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 11.508
· The 2018-2019 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 12.745
· The 2017-2018 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 12.354
· The 2016-2017 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 9.326
· The 2015-2016 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 3.549
· The 2014-2015 אימפקט פקטור of Bone Research is 1.31
The אימפקט פקטור 2013-2014 of Bone Research is still under analysis. Stay Tuned!
The אימפקט פקטור 2012-2013 of Bone Research is still under analysis. Stay Tuned!
The אימפקט פקטור 2011-2012 of Bone Research is still under analysis. Stay Tuned!

Publications Cites Dataset

Year Publications Citations
Year Publications Citations
2012 0 3
2013 29 11
2014 22 46
2015 21 177
2016 28 494
2017 31 1021
2018 37 1426
2019 35 2097
2020 42 3329
2021 5 380
Publications Cites Dataset

· The Bone Research has published 0 reports and received 3 citations in 2012.
· The Bone Research has published 29 reports and received 11 citations in 2013.
· The Bone Research has published 22 reports and received 46 citations in 2014.
· The Bone Research has published 21 reports and received 177 citations in 2015.
· The Bone Research has published 28 reports and received 494 citations in 2016.
· The Bone Research has published 31 reports and received 1021 citations in 2017.
· The Bone Research has published 37 reports and received 1426 citations in 2018.
· The Bone Research has published 35 reports and received 2097 citations in 2019.
· The Bone Research has published 42 reports and received 3329 citations in 2020.
· The Bone Research has published 5 reports and received 380 citations in 2021.
· The total publications of Bone Research is 250.
· The total citations of Bone Research is 8984.

Bone Research
Journal Profile
Bone Research | Academic Accelerator - About the Journal

About

Bone Research is an open access, fully peer-reviewed journal publishing the foremost progress and novel understanding of all aspects of bone science. The journal highlights the breakthrough discoveries in basic and clinical aspects of bone biology, pathophysiology and regeneration, as well as other significant findings related to bone.Covering all aspects of bone science including its subspecialties, Bone Research publishes original, high-quality, peer-reviewed papers including research articles, reviews, correspondence and comments. Submissions are favored regarding studies on the occurrence and development of bone and cartilage, bone metabolism, bone related diseases, bone regeneration and related biological materials.Original research articles will be published under, but not limited to, the following headings:Morphogenesis of bone and cartilage; Musculoskeletal diseases;Metabolic bone diseases;Bone regeneration and bone tissue engineering;Bone related biomaterials;Clinical studies. None

ISSN
2095-4700
ISSN

The ISSN of Bone Research is 2095-4700 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

ISSN (Online)
2095-6231
ISSN (Online)

The ISSN (Online) of Bone Research is 2095-6231 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

Publisher
Nature Publishing Group
Publisher

Bone Research is published by Nature Publishing Group .

Publication Frequency
Quarterly
Publication Frequency

Bone Research publishes reports Quarterly .

Coverage
2013 - Present
Coverage

The Publication History of Bone Research covers 2013 - Present .

Open Access
YES
Open Access

Bone Research is an Open Access (OA) Journal. Open Access stands for unrestricted access and unrestricted reuse. With Open Access, researchers can read and build on the findings of others without restriction. Much scientific and medical research is paid for with public funds. Open Access allows taxpayers to see the results of their investment.

Publication Fee
Review
Publication Fee

Bone Research is an Open Access (OA) Journal. Open Access stands for unrestricted access and unrestricted reuse. With Open Access, researchers can read and build on the findings of others without restriction. Open Access allows taxpayers to see the results of their investment. Please share or review the publication fee with the community.

Language
English
Language

The language of Bone Research is English .

Country/Region
United Kingdom
Country/Region

The publisher of Bone Research is Nature Publishing Group , which locates in United Kingdom .

What is Impact Factor?

The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a scientometric index calculated by Clarivate that reflects the yearly average number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher impact factor values are often deemed to be more important, or carry more intrinsic prestige in their respective fields, than those with lower values.

Bone Research | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

Impact factor is commonly used to evaluate the relative importance of a journal within its field and to measure the frequency with which the “average article” in a journal has been cited in a particular time period. Journal which publishes more review articles will get highest IFs. Journals with higher IFs believed to be more important than those with lower ones. According to Eugene Garfield “impact simply reflects the ability of the journals and editors to attract the best paper available.” Journal which publishes more review articles will get maximum IFs. The Impact Factor of an academic journal is a scientometric Metric that reflects the yearly average number of citations that recent articles published in a given journal received. It is frequently used as a Metric for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher Impact Factor are often deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. The Bone Research Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2020) by papers published in the Bone Research during the two preceding years (2018-2019). Note that 2020 Impact Factor are reported in 2021; they cannot be calculated until all of the 2020 publications have been processed by the indexing agency. New journals, which are indexed from their first published issue, will receive an impact factor after two years of indexing; in this case, the citations to the year prior to Volume 1, and the number of articles published in the year prior to Volume 1, are known zero values. Journals that are indexed starting with a volume other than the first volume will not get an impact factor until they have been indexed for three years. Occasionally, Journal Citation Reports assigns an impact factor to new journals with less than two years of indexing, based on partial citation data. The calculation always uses two complete and known years of item counts, but for new titles one of the known counts is zero. Annuals and other irregular publications sometimes publish no items in a particular year, affecting the count. The impact factor relates to a specific time period; it is possible to calculate it for any desired period. In addition to the 2-year Impact Factor, the 3-year Impact Factor, 4-year Impact Factor, 5-year Impact Factor, Real-Time Impact Factor can provide further insights and factors into the impact of Bone Research.

History

The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Impact factors are calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). ISI was acquired by Thomson Scientific & Healthcare in 1992, and became known as Thomson ISI. In 2018, Thomson ISI was sold to Onex Corporation and Baring Private Equity Asia. They founded a new corporation, Clarivate, which is now the publisher of the JCR.

Use

The impact factor is used to compare different journals within a certain field. The Web of Science indexes more than 11,500 science and social science journals. Journal impact factors are often used to evaluate the merit of individual articles and individual researchers. This use of impact factors was summarised by Hoeffel:

Impact Factor is not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles but there is nothing better and it has the advantage of already being in existence and is, therefore, a good technique for scientific evaluation. Experience has shown that in each specialty the best journals are those in which it is most difficult to have an article accepted, and these are the journals that have a high impact factor. Most of these journals existed long before the impact factor was devised. The use of impact factor as a measure of quality is widespread because it fits well with the opinion we have in each field of the best journals in our specialty....In conclusion, prestigious journals publish papers of high level. Therefore, their impact factor is high, and not the contrary.

Eugene Garfield

In brief, Impact factors may be used by:
  • Authors to decide where to submit an article for publication.
  • Libraries to make collection development decisions
  • Academic departments to assess academic productivity
  • Academic departments to make decisions on promotion and tenure.
As impact factors are a journal-level metric, rather than an article- or individual-level metric, this use is controversial. Garfield agrees with Hoeffel,but warns about the "misuse in evaluating individuals" because there is "a wide variation [of citations] from article to article within a single journal". Other things to consider about Impact Factors:
  • Many journals do not have an impact factor.
  • The impact factor cannot assess the quality of individual articles. Even if citations were evenly distributed among articles, the impact factor would only measure the interests of other researchers in an article, not its importance and usefulness.
  • Only research articles, technical notes and reviews are “citable” items. Editorials, letters, news items and meeting abstracts are “non-citable items”.
  • Only a small percentage of articles are highly cited and they are found in a small subset of journals. This small proportion accounts for a large percentage of citations.
  • Controversial papers, such as those based on fraudulent data, may be highly cited, distorting the impact factor of a journal.
  • Citation bias may exist. For example, English language resources may be favoured. Authors may cite their own work.
Moreover, informed and careful use of these impact data is essential, and should be based on a thorough understanding of the methodology used to generate impact factors. There are controversial aspects of using impact factors:
  • It is not clear whether the number of times a paper is cited measures its actual quality.
  • Some databases that calculate impact factors fail to incorporate publications including textbooks, handbooks and reference books.
  • Certain disciplines have low numbers of journals and usage. Therefore, one should only compare journals or researchers within the same discipline.
  • Review articles normally are cited more often and therefore can skew results.
  • Self-citing may also skew results.
  • Some resources used to calculate impact factors have inadequate international coverage.
  • Editorial policies can artificially inflate an impact factor.
Impact factors have often been used in advancement and tenure decision-making. Many recognize that this is a coarse tool for such important decisions, and that a multitude of factors should be taken into account in these deliberations. When considering the use of the impact factor (IF), keep these aspects in mind:
  • IF analysis is limited to citations from the journals indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge. Currently, the Web of Science indexes only 8621 journals across the full breadth of the sciences, and just 3121 in the social sciences.
  • A high IF/citation rate says nothing about the quality -- or even, validity -- of the references being cited. Notorious or even retracted articles often attract a lot of attention, hence a high number of citations. The notority related to the first publication on "cold fusion" is one such example.
  • Journals that publish more "review articles" are often found near the top of the rankings. While not known for publishing new, creative findings, these individual articles tend to be heavily cited.
  • The IF measures the average number of citations to articles in the journal -- given this, a small number of highly-cited articles will skew the figure.
  • It takes several years for new journals to be added to the list of titles indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge, so these newer titles will be under-represented.
  • It's alleged that journal editors have learned to "game" the system, encouraging authors to cite their works previously published in the same journal.
Comparing Journals Across Disciplines? Not a good idea! Using Impact Factors within a given discipline should only be done with great care, as described above. Using impact factor data to compare journals across disciplines is even more problematic. Here are some of the reasons:
  • Disciplines where older literature is still referenced, such as Chemistry and Mathematics, offer challenges to the methodolgy since older citations (older than two years) are not used to calculate the impact factor for a given journal. (Five-year impact factor analysis, which can be calculated using the Journal Citation Index database, helps smooth out this problem only to some degree.)
  • Different disciplines have different practices regarding tendency to cite larger numbers of references. Higher overall citation rates will bump upward impact factor measurements.
  • Where it's common for large numbers of authors to collaborate on a single paper, such as in Physics, the tendency of authors to cite themselves (and in this case, more authors) will result in increased citation rates.

Pros and Cons of the Impact Factor

Pros:

  • A vetted, established metric for measuring journal impact within a discipline.
  • Designed to eliminate bias based on journal size and frequency.
Cons:
  • Individual articles makes an uneven contribution to overall Impact Factor.
  • Impact Factor does not account for certain things, things like context (postive or negative citaion) and intentionality (self-citation).
  • The metric is proprietary to and bound by the contents of the Thomson Reuters database.
  • Citations, on which the Impact Factor is based, count for less than 1% of an article's overall use.

Criticism

Numerous critiques have been made regarding the use of impact factors. A 2007 study noted that the most fundamental flaw is that impact factors present the mean of data that are not normally distributed, and suggested that it would be more appropriate to present the median of these data. There is also a more general debate on the validity of the impact factor as a measure of journal importance and the effect of policies that editors may adopt to boost their impact factor (perhaps to the detriment of readers and writers). Other criticism focuses on the effect of the impact factor on behavior of scholars, editors and other stakeholders. Others have made more general criticisms, arguing that emphasis on impact factor results from negative influence of neoliberal policies on academia claiming that what is needed is not just replacement of the impact factor with more sophisticated metrics for science publications but also discussion on the social value of research assessment and the growing precariousness of scientific careers in higher education.
Experts stress that there are limitations in using impact factors to evaluate a scholar's work. There are many reasons cited for not relying on impact factor alone to evaluate the output of a particular individual. Among these are the following:

  • A single factor is not sufficient for evaluating an author's work.
  • Journal values are meaningless unless compared within the same discipline. Impact factors vary among disciplines.
  • The impact factor was originally devised to show the impact of a specific journal, not a specific scholar. The quality and impact of the author's work may extend beyond the impact of a particular journal.
According to Jim Testa, a researcher for ThomsonReuters Scientific, the most widespread misuse of the Impact Factor is to evaluate the work of an individual author (instead of a journal). "To say that because a researcher is publishing in a certain journal, he or she is more influential or deserves more credit is not necessarily true. There are many other variables to consider." (interview 6/26/2008 in Thomson Reuters blog entry)