Background

Health sciences libraries have historically evaluated their journal collections through the methods of bibliometrics. Citation analysis (CA), a form of bibliometrics, is a method of collection evaluation which provides evidence-based data by analyzing the scholarly communication trends of a specific population.[1] Typically, the data supplied by CA highlights patterns in journal usage and offers insights for evaluating collection value and relevance, identifying gaps, guiding acquisitions or cancellations, and establishing a core journal collection.[1�5] CA is not without its drawbacks. One significant factor is that there is no standardized methodology due to the variations in CA study types.[6] In an effort to rigorously substantiate the evidence produced in this study, the author purposely documented the methods in a manner which reduces bias and promotes reproducibility. Past CA studies have focused upon one profession while librarians are required to balance a collection budget for a health sciences college as a whole.[7�12] The purpose of this study was to provide evidence-based data to assess the relevance of a journal collection for multiple health sciences programs as a collective and provide a roadmap for other librarians to assess and supplement their collections in a rigorous manner.

Methodology

This study was conducted in three phases. Phase one identified journals most frequently used for publication by health sciences faculty at Decker College, Binghamton University, through a systematic search of three databases: Web of Science, PubMed, and CINAHL. Results were screened by title/abstract, and full text by two researchers using masked review to reduce bias, applying inclusion criteria of author affiliation and publication type. The selection process was tracked using a PRISMA flow diagram. Data were collected on the frequency in which journals were used for faculty publication, library holdings, and available COUNTER and interlibrary loan (ILL) statistics. Journals were then ranked by publication frequency and analyzed using Bradford�s Law of Distribution.[13] This distribution divides journals into three zones: a small core with the highest citation rates, a middle group with moderate citation rates, and a larger group with low citation rates. In phase two, references from the phase one publications were extracted and screened using the same inclusion criteria. Referenced journals were sorted by citation frequency, and data collection mirrored phase one. Phase three developed a core journal set based on highest publication or citation frequency, usage data (COUNTER and ILL), and relevance to the identified health sciences programs, such as nursing, public health, physical and occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology. The health sciences librarian/author determined a journal�s relevance to the health sciences programs by using experience and the journals� titles. All data was provided on the open access platform osf.io (https://tinyurl.com/2s422525) to ensure transparency.

Findings

Searches across Web of Science, CINAHL Ultimate, and PubMed, limited to the years 2020-June 2024, identified 6,260 publications by health sciences faculty. After deduplication and screening in Rayyan, 104 articles met inclusion criteria. These articles were published across 53 journals, with Nursing Science Quarterly dominating zone 1 (29 publications). Overall, 90.5% of publishing journals were available in the library catalog. Usage patterns showed that publication frequency did not always align with COUNTER statistics: for example, the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health had high usage despite few faculty publications. Phase two analysis of 3,598 references revealed 1,148 cited journals. Zone 1 contained 49 journals accounting for 796 citations; 100% were available in the library catalog. Coverage declined across zones, with 96% of zone 2 and 85% of zone 3 journals available. Nursing Science Quarterly was the most cited journal, while multidisciplinary titles such as Nature, Science, and The Lancet had the highest COUNTER usage. Phase three established a core set of journals based on publication frequency (zones 1 and 2), citation patterns, and usage data (COUNTER and ILL). Journals applicable to health sciences programs were prioritized, including Nursing Science Quarterly, which ranked highly in both publication output, citation frequency, and usage statistics. Discipline-specific journals with strong COUNTER usage including Annual Review of Public Health, The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Journal of Fluency Disorders, and American Journal of Occupational Therapy were also included in the core set. Journals with the highest ILL demand -- Seminars in Speech and Language, Journal of Palliative Medicine, Journal of Telemedicine, and Journal of Asthma were closely aligned with health sciences program research needs and were highlighted for future acquisition consideration. The resulting core reference set provides a data-driven foundation for ongoing collection development decisions.

Conclusion

Although this study closely followed previous citation analysis (CA) methodologies to strengthen rigor, several barriers may have introduced bias or limitations.[3,4,14] Inconsistent author affiliation reporting required broad database searches and may have resulted in missed publications. The absence of Scopus access necessitated manual reference extraction, increasing the risk of human error. Variability in COUNTER data across providers and the inability to isolate usage by academic program resulted in the need to exclude multidisciplinary journals from the final core list. These challenges underscore the need for standardized and transparent CA methodology and reporting practices as well as open access extraction platforms to support rigorous journal collection analysis. Despite these limitations, these findings affirm the value of the library�s existing journal collection, reinforce its importance in supporting faculty research and publication activities, and provide evidence-based support for future acquisitions. Future studies which employ consistent and replicable methods will enhance the strength of the evidence and more accurately define the research journal needs of academic programs.

References

1. Hoffmann K, Doucette L. A review of citation analysis methodologies for collection management | hoffmann | college & research libraries [Internet]. 2017 Apr 25. doi:https://doi.org/10.5860/crl-254

2. Ashman AB. An examination of the research objectives of recent citation analysis studies. Collection Management. 2009 Apr 1;34(2):112�28. doi:10.1080/01462670902725885

3. Gureev VN, Mazov NA. Assessment of the relevance of journals in research libraries using bibliometrics (a review). Sci TechInf Proc. 2015 Jan 1;42(1):30�40. doi:10.3103/S0147688215010050

4. Martindale T. More than collection development: using local citation analysis to begin a career in business librarianship. Collection Management. 2020 Oct 1;45(4):321�34. doi:10.1080/01462679.2020.1715315

5. Martindale T, Yancy B. Cited reference analysis in a national laboratory to assess journal usage. Serials Review. 2022 Jan;48(1/2):4�15. doi:10.1080/00987913.2022.2066875

6. Blecic DD. Measurements of journal use: an analysis of the correlations between three methods. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1999 Jan;87(1):20�5. PubMed PMID: 9934525; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC226509.

7. Rieger O. Academic health sciences libraries: Structural models and perspectives. ITHAKA S+R. 2020 Oct. doi:https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.314248.

8. Allen M (Peg), Jacobs SK, Levy JR. Mapping the literature of nursing: 1996�2000. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Apr;94(2):206�20. PubMed PMID: 16636714; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1435835.

9. Brown T, Gutman SA, Ho YS, Fong KNK. A bibliometric analysis of occupational therapy publications. Scand J Occup Ther. 2018 Jan;25(1):1�14. doi:10.1080/11038128.2017.1329344 PubMed PMID: 28508696.

10. Fell DW, Burnham JF, Buchanan MJ, Horchen HA, Scherr JA. Mapping the core journals of the physical therapy literature. J Med Libr Assoc. 2011 Jul;99(3):202�7. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.99.3.007 PubMed PMID: 21753912; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3133899.

11. Hunt GE, Happell B, Chan SWC, Cleary M. Citation analysis of mental health nursing journals: How should we rank thee? International Journal of Mental Health Nursing. 2012;21(6):576�80. doi:10.1111/j.1447-0349.2012.00815.x

12. Rethlefsen ML. Citation analysis of Minnesota Department of Health official publications and journal articles: a needs assessment for the RN Barr Library. J Med Libr Assoc. 2007 Jul;95(3):260�6. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.95.3.260 PubMed PMID: 17641756; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1924933.

13. Drott MC, Griffith BC. An empirical examination of Bradford�s law and the scattering of scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1978;29(5):238�46. doi:10.1002/asi.4630290506

14. Pastva J, Shank J, Gutzman KE, Kaul M, Kubilius RK. Capturing and analyzing publication, citation, and usage data for contextual collection development. The Serials Librarian. 2018 May 31;74(1�4):102�10. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2018.1427996

Editor�s Note: This article is based on another by the same author published in Medical Reference Services Quarterly available here.

DCT Featured Article - May 12, 2026