Abstract
Introduction
To evaluate if advanced neuroimaging research is mainly conducted by imaging specialists, we investigated the number of first authorships by radiologists and non-radiologist scientists in articles published in the field of advanced neuroimaging in the past 10 years.
Methods
Articles in the field of advanced neuroimaging identified in this retrospective bibliometric analysis were divided in four groups, depending on the imaging technique used. For all included studies, educational background of the first authors was recorded (based on available online curriculum vitae) and classified in subgroups, depending on their specialty. Finally, journal impact factors were recorded and comparatively assessed among subgroups as a metric of research quality.
Results
A total number of 3831 articles were included in the study. Radiologists accounted as first authors for only 12.8 % of these publications, while 56.9 % of first authors were researchers without a medical degree. Mean impact factor (IF) of journals with non-MD researchers as first authors was significantly higher than the MD subgroup (p < 10−20), while mean IF of journals with radiologists as first authors was significantly lower than articles authored by other MD specialists (p < 10−11).
Conclusions
The majority of the studies in the field of advanced neuroimaging in the last decade is conducted by professional figures other than radiologists, who account for less than the 13 % of the publications. Furthermore, the mean IF value of radiologists-authored articles was the lowest among all subgroups. These results, taken together, should question the radiology community about its future role in the development of advanced neuroimaging.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bandettini PA (2009) What’s new in neuroimaging methods? Ann N Y Acad Sci 1156:260–293. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04420.x
Van Horn JD, Toga AW (2014) Human neuroimaging as a “Big Data” science. Brain Imaging Behav 8(2):323–331. doi:10.1007/s11682-013-9255-y
Hillman BJ (2000) The past 25 years in medical imaging research: a memoir. Radiology 214(1):11–14. doi:10.1148/radiology.214.1.r00ja5111
Chow DS, Ha R, Filippi CG (2015) Increased rates of authorship in radiology publications: a bibliometric analysis of 142,576 articles published worldwide by radiologists between 1991 and 2012. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204(1):W52–W57. doi:10.2214/AJR.14.12852
Dang W, McInnes MD, Kielar AZ, Hong J (2015) A comprehensive analysis of authorship in radiology journals. PLoS One 10(9):e0139005. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139005
Sardanelli F, Bashir H, Berzaczy D, Cannella G, Espeland A, Flor N, Helbich T, Hunink M, Malone DE, Mann R, Muzzupappa C, Petersen LJ, Riklund K, Sconfienza LM, Serafin Z, Spronk S, Stoker J, van Beek EJ, Vorwerk D, Leo GD (2014) The role of imaging specialists as authors of systematic reviews on diagnostic and interventional imaging and its impact on scientific quality: report from the EuroAIM Evidence-based Radiology Working Group. Radiology 272(2):533–540. doi:10.1148/radiol.14131730
Ray CE Jr, Gupta R, Blackwell J (2006) Changes in the American interventional radiology literature: comparison over a 10-year time period. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 29(4):599–604. doi:10.1007/s00270-005-0209-7
World Health Organization (1993) The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: diagnostic criteria for research.
Thomson Reuters website journal citation reports. scientific.thomson.com/products/jcr/.
Bellotti R, Pascazio S (2012) Editorial: advanced physical methods in brain research. Eur Phys J Plus 127(145)
Gore JC (2003) Principles and practice of functional MRI of the human brain. J Clin Invest 112(1):4–9. doi:10.1172/JCI19010
van den Heuvel MP, Hulshoff Pol HE (2010) Exploring the brain network: a review on resting-state fMRI functional connectivity. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 20(8):519–534
Holdsworth SJ, Bammer R (2008) Magnetic resonance imaging techniques: fMRI, DWI, and PWI. Semin Neurol 28(4):395–406. doi:10.1055/s-0028-1083697
Oz G, Alger JR, Barker PB, Bartha R, Bizzi A, Boesch C, Bolan PJ, Brindle KM, Cudalbu C, Dincer A, Dydak U, Emir UE, Frahm J, Gonzalez RG, Gruber S, Gruetter R, Gupta RK, Heerschap A, Henning A, Hetherington HP, Howe FA, Huppi PS, Hurd RE, Kantarci K, Klomp DW, Kreis R, Kruiskamp MJ, Leach MO, Lin AP, Luijten PR, Marjanska M, Maudsley AA, Meyerhoff DJ, Mountford CE, Nelson SJ, Pamir MN, Pan JW, Peet AC, Poptani H, Posse S, Pouwels PJ, Ratai EM, Ross BD, Scheenen TW, Schuster C, Smith IC, Soher BJ, Tkac I, Vigneron DB, Kauppinen RA (2014) Clinical proton MR spectroscopy in central nervous system disorders. Radiology 270(3):658–679. doi:10.1148/radiol.13130531
Valentini V, Gaudino S, Spagnolo P, Armenise S, Tartaglione T, Marano P (2003) Diffusion and perfusion MR imaging. Rays 28(1):29–43
Dong P, Loh M, Mondry A (2005) The “impact factor” revisited. Biomed Digit Libr 2:7. doi:10.1186/1742-5581-2-7
Seglen PO (1997) Citations and journal impact factors: questionable indicators of research quality. Allergy 52(11):1050–1056
Strange K (2008) Authorship: why not just toss a coin? Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 295(3):C567–C575. doi:10.1152/ajpcell.00208.2008
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
We declare that this manuscript does not contain clinical studies or patient data.
Conflict of interest
We declare that we have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cocozza, S., Russo, C., Pontillo, G. et al. Is advanced neuroimaging for neuroradiologists? A systematic review of the scientific literature of the last decade. Neuroradiology 58, 1233–1239 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-016-1761-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-016-1761-3