影响因素：过时的人工制品或垫脚石期刊认证？
Impact Factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?
摘要：
对加菲尔德的期刊影响因子及其作为汤森路透影响因子的具体实施的回顾揭示了这个常用的期刊地位指标的几个弱点。关键的限制包括引用和被引用文献之间的不匹配，欺骗性的三位小数显示掩盖了真正的精度，以及缺乏置信区间。这些都是小问题，很容易修改，应该纠正，但需要更实质性的改进。有迹象表明，科学界寻求并需要对期刊程序进行更好的认证，以提高已发表科学的质量。对编辑和审查程序的全面认证有助于确保有适当的程序来发现重复和欺诈性提交的文件。
英文摘要：
A review of Garfield's journal impact factor and its specific implementation as the Thomson Reuters Impact Factor reveals several weaknesses in this commonly-used indicator of journal standing. Key limitations include the mismatch between citing and cited documents, the deceptive display of three decimals that belies the real precision, and the absence of confidence intervals. These are minor issues that are easily amended and should be corrected, but more substantive improvements are needed. There are indications that the scientific community seeks and needs better certification of journal procedures to improve the quality of published science. Comprehensive certification of editorial and review procedures could help ensure adequate procedures to detect duplicate and fraudulent submissions.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
