<i>Obstetric Medicine</i>, impact factors and publishing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obstetric Medicine is indexed in the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) database, which enables visibility of high-quality, peer-reviewed publications even with limited circulation.What is the "Journal Impact Factor"?JIF is defined as the citations in the JCR year to items published in the journal in the previous two years, divided by the total number of citable items (comprising articles and reviews) published in the journal in the previous two years. 1 The calculation of JIF uses as the denominator research and review articles (but not letters or meeting abstracts).For the current JCR year (2022) the Obstetric Medicine IF is 0.7, derived from 103 citations in 2022 from 143 citable items in 2020 to 2021.With the rise in the number of journals published (associated also with some questionable publishing practices), objective metrics are important to identify a journal's reputation.The JIF was designed to create a generalised, journal-level metric showing only a specific type of scholarly use in a single year.While this is important, it may not fully reflect the importance and impact of a journal on the scientific/medical community it serves.As an example, Obstetric Medicine continues to routinely publish interesting case reports, unlike many other journals today.We feel that unusual occurrences in disorders in pregnancy are important information to share.However, case reports are unlikely to be cited (but contribute to the denominator), producing a negative effect on the JIF.Our journal also endeavours to accept articles from a broad spectrum of international authors.We have an international readership and we can all learn from experiences in other medical environments, although some of these articles are not highly cited.For the period 2020/2021, the majority of publications were from the UK (28%), Australia (19%), Canada (17%), India (13%) and USA (8%), but we also published articles from Lebanon, Colombia, South Africa, Norway, Cyprus, Spain, Mexico and Japan.Our most cited articles during this 2020/2021 period highlight the diverse nature of publications in the journal.The top three include a systematic review of the offspring health outcomes of women with antenatal depression, 2 a review on asthma in pregnancy, 3 and a review on the potential maternal health consequences of cellular fetal microchimerism. 4Our most highly cited research articles covered fertility in women with psoriasis, and pregnancy-related inappropriate sinus tachycardia.In the current issue we feature research articles on pregnancy outcomes in autosomal dominant tubulointerstitial kidney disease, 5 a systematic review of maternal and fetal outcomes in patients with noncirrhotic portal hypertension in pregnancy, 6 and a cohort study of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal mental health screening, illness and pregnancy outcomes. 7 Having hoped for an impact factor for a long time, the next question for us as a journal is whether this now changes anything about our approach to future articles or issues.Should this influence our choice of article or focus
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.240 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".