Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40696548›Full record

ArticleCurrent neuropharmacology2026

Resilience and Recalibration of Bibliometric Indicators in Neurosciences and Neuropharmacology Journals After COVID-19: A Longitudinal Rate of Change Analysis Using Mixed-Effects Models.

Camilo Rios-Castaneda, Heriberto Aguirre-Meneses, Marco-Antonio Nunez-Gaona, Ernesto Roldan-Valadez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current neuropharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Camilo Rios-CastanedaDivision of Neurosciences, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitacion 'Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra', Mexico City, 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-3216-0119
Heriberto Aguirre-MenesesDepartment of Medical Systems, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitacion 'Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra', Mexico City, 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-2655-1367
Marco-Antonio Nunez-GaonaDepartment of Medical Systems, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitacion 'Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra', Mexico City, 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-8450-6003
Ernesto Roldan-ValadezDivision of Neurosciences, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitacion 'Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra', Mexico City, 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-7116-5289

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented changes in the scholarly publishing landscape, particularly in biomedical fields such as Neurosciences and Neuropharmacology. Several journals experienced steep, short-term increases in citation metrics during 2020-2022. However, it remains uncertain whether these surges reflected a sustainable impact or temporary inflation. This study aimed to analyze post-pandemic bibliometric behavior by evaluating the Rate of Change (RoC) in key journal-level indicators from 2013 to 2023.

methodsA retrospective longitudinal study was conducted on 233 neuroscience journals indexed in the Journal Citation Reports. Six indicators were analyzed: Journal Impact Factor (JIF), Eigenfactor Score, Immediacy Index, Article Influence Score, Cited Half-Life, and Total Citations. RoC was calculated for each metric on an annual basis. Mixed-effects models with random intercepts and slopes were constructed to evaluate longitudinal trajectories and identify changes associated with three defined periods: prepandemic (2013-2019), pandemic (2020-2022), and post-pandemic (2023). Subgroup analyses assessed journal quartiles and categories to explore variations in impact resilience.

resultsThe pandemic period (2020-2022) showed significant increases in RoC for JIF (mean β = +4.85, p = 0.004), Immediacy Index (β = +6.22, p = 0.002), and Total Citations (β = +5.88, p < 0.001). These changes were more prominent in top-quartile journals and those classified under Neuropharmacology. In contrast, alternative metrics such as the Eigenfactor Score and Article Influence Score remained relatively stable across the same period. In 2023, most indicators exhibited a normalization trend, with JIF and Immediacy Index showing marked deceleration in RoC, suggesting a post-pandemic recalibration. Journals with sustained positive trajectories were primarily concentrated in high-impact clusters, with Current Neuropharmacology ranking among the top performers by RoC slope. DISCUSSION: The findings demonstrate that the surge in citations during the pandemic was primarily transitory and varied across bibliometric indicators. Traditional metrics like JIF and Immediacy Index were more sensitive to systemic shocks, while influence-based indicators (Eigenfactor and Article Influence Score) showed higher temporal resilience. The application of RoC allowed for a nuanced interpretation of metric trajectories and minimized misinterpretation of short-term spikes. Limitations include reliance on publicly available data and potential lag effects in citation behavior not fully captured within the 10-year window.

conclusionThis study reveals that pandemic-era citation inflation in Neuroscience journals was largely temporary and metric-dependent. RoC-based modeling offers a reproducible and adaptable approach for assessing the sustainability of bibliometric trends. These insights can help editors, funders, and academic institutions better understand journal performance, make informed decisions about research dissemination, and refine metrics-based evaluation frameworks in the post-pandemic publishing environment.

Indexed as

BibliometricsCOVID-19NeuropharmacologyNeurosciencesPeriodicals as TopicHumansJournal Impact FactorLongitudinal StudiesPandemicsRetrospective StudiesBibliometricscitation analysisCOVID-19 pandemicimpact factorlongitudinal studiesneuropharmacologyneurosciencesscholarly publishing

Identifiers

PMID40696548
PMCPMC13269942

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.