Publication outlets for healthcare financial research: A study of journal quality perceptions

• Published date: 01 August 2018
• Date: 01 August 2018
• Author: H. Harrison Liu,Hanni Liu,Pamela C. Smith,Dana A. Forgione
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12157

Received: 28 November2016 Revised: 19 July 2017 Accepted:26 October 2017

DOI: 10.1111/faam.12157

REVIEW ARTICLE

Publication outlets for healthcare financial

research: A study of journal quality perceptions

Dana A. Forgione1Hanni Liu2Pamela C. Smith1

H. Harrison Liu1

1Collegeof Business, University of Texas at San

Antonio,San Antonio, TX, 78249-0632, USA

2TheO'Malley School of Business, Manhattan

College,Riverdale, NY, 10471, USA

Correspondence

DanaA. Forgione, College of Business, University

ofTexasat San Antonio, One UTSA Circle, San

Antonio,TX 78249-0632, USA.

Email:dana.forgione@utsa.edu

Abstract

Publications in high quality journals often serve to indicate research

productivity.However, many top-rated journals infrequently publish

cross-disciplinary topics such as healthcare financial management

(HFM). So, academic administrators and HFM researchers find it

challenging to evaluate the quality of the work. Journals open to

publishing HFM articles are distributed across multiple disciplines.

Each field has its own journal rankings typically focused on their

primary subject area. Starting with prior literature, we form a

cross-disciplinary journal list and solicit preliminary input from

editors, associated editors, reviewers, and authors. We then solicit

confirmatory ranking input from independent researchers in a

holdout sample.

KEYWORDS

citation indexing, financial management, healthcare, journal ranking,

survey

1INTRODUCTION

Academic journals and their rankings provide an important structure for academic disciplines. The number of arti-

cles a researcher publishes in high quality journals typically becomes a major indicator of their research productiv-

ity (Pickerd, Stephens, Summers, & Wood, 2011), and it factors into promotion and tenure decisions (Glover, Prawitt,

& Wood, 2006). The Chartered Association of Business Schools in the UK produces an Academic Journal Guide that

is updated periodically (CABS, 2017). The Australian Business Dean's Council produces the ABDC Journal Quality List

(ABDC, 2017) that was recently revised. The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business in the US lists 17

sources of information potentially useful for journal quality assessment (AACSB International, 2017). These rankings

do not alwayscoincide for specific journals, which may, in part, be attributable to the differing perspectives on research

and social/public sector contexts of the originating countries. Notably,however, these lists are all organized by pri-

mary academic discipline. Each academic discipline in business typically relies on these or other sources to maintain

a ranking list of journals for faculty performance evaluation. In general, this provides a quality proxy that helps aca-

demic managers and college or university-wide tenure and promotion committee members to evaluate research that

may be outside their own areas of specialization. Forinstance, the three top-rated accounting journals are usually The

288 c

2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/faam FinancialAcc & Man. 2018;34:288–305.

FORGIONE ETAL.289

Accounting Review,theJournal of Accounting Research,andtheJournal of Accounting and Economics (Chan, Chan, Seow,

& Tam,2009). It is important to recognize that the quality of an individual paper is not necessarily synonymous with

the ranking of the journal in which it is published. Many high quality research studies are published in journals other

than the top-rated three, and occasionally there are flawed papers published in the top-rated journals. Nonetheless,

if a researcher focuses on mainstream topics within a primary discipline, such as accounting, the journal rankings are

often relied upon as an indicator of research quality—especially by members of college or university-wide promotion

and tenure committees (in contrast see, Singh, Haddad, & Chow, 2007). Manycolleges of business predominantly use

widely recognized ranking sources, such as the CABS list, which are organized by primary academic discipline.

However, if one researches a sub-topic or,even more difficult, a cross-disciplinary topic, it becomes significantly

more challenging to evaluate the research quality, and far fewer dedicated rankingstudies are available for guidance

(e.g.,Lowensohn & Samelson, 2006). For example, governmental accounting and accounting for nonprofit organizations

are sub-disciplines of accounting; yet, as of the most recent study available, only 3% of publications in the top-rated

accounting journals have been from these areas (Copley,Roof, & Shifflett, 2009). This may also be partly attributable

to the predominant US focus on the for-profit sector and quantitative, market-based research, with less emphasis on

the public sector and qualitative research in general. High quality, dedicated journals, such as Financial Accountabil-

ity & Management, are exceptions that are often less widely recognized across the broader academic community.Any

research sub-discipline likely faces a similar situation. Authors then either face the challenge of gaining the interest

of mainstream journal editors, or they pursue publication in more salient journals that are often not ranked in their

departmental lists and are thus marginalized in performance assessments. Toappropriately evaluate the quality of sub-

disciplinary or cross-disciplinary research, current, dedicated rankingstudies are needed. In our view, it is not sufficient

to simply acknowledge the inadequacies of applying generalized ranking lists to assess specialized performance, with

the consideration that credible alternativeguidance is not available. Rather,it is incumbent upon the research commu-

nity to produce such credible alternative evidence of journal quality,and seek to advance its recognition. Accordingly,

weoffer this present study. It is specifically dedicated to the cross-disciplinary field of healthcare financial management

(HFM)-related research.

1.1 Importance of HFM research

The dramaticincrease in healthcare expenditures and the numerous national healthcare reforms in recent years makes

thefinancial management aspect of healthcare an important, cross-disciplinary research field. Healthcare affects every

person on the planet, constitutes an enormous portion of governmental budgets, and is frequently at the center of

national public policy debates. The healthcare industry consists of mostly governmental and nonprofit organizations,

so it is not surprising that articles addressing HFM-related topics make up a small percentage of content in the tradi-

tional group of top-rated accounting and financial research journals—particularly US journals where the public sector

has been less emphasized than in Europe and other countries. Researchers in this cross-disciplinary field, therefore,

must select the most appropriate outlets for their research from such related fields as economics, finance, government,

health administration, informatics, law, management, medical care, nonprofit organizations, nursing administration,

public administration,and others. Unfortunately, there is a lack of cross-disciplinary rankings for journals that are open

to publishing papers in HFM, and available published rankings are considerably outdated. The most recent published

ranking of journals concerning healthcare management is Williams, Stewart, O'Conner,Savage, and Shewchuk (2002),

which is not focused on the financial perspective. Many business school faculty and administrators who make pro-

motion and tenure decisions may also be generally unfamiliar with healthcare management/administration research

issues and the related journals. This makes it difficult for evaluators to assess the quality of research in this subject

area.

Much of the national public policy debates around the world regarding healthcare focuses on the financial man-

agement aspects of healthcare; and many healthcare professionals, financial management experts, and academic

researchers provide various documentation, data, analyses, research findings, and recommendations to inform this

debate. Their work strives to improve the quality, cost efficiency, access and effectiveness of healthcare for all