scholarly journals HOW TO EVALUATE SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 17-19
Author(s):  
Alberto Azoubel Antunes
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Scientific Production ◽  
Index Method ◽  
H Index ◽  
Scientific Papers ◽  
Evaluation Of Teaching ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

Objective: To conduct a critical analysis of the two main bibliometric indexes used by science: the impact factor and the H index. Method: Research was conducted on PubMed using the keywords: impact factor, Bibliometrics and H index. Results: The citations of articles tend to follow a curve in which the articles published in a given year increase sharply to a peak occurring between two and six years after its publication. From this peak citations decline over time. Conclusion: The analysis of the scientific merit should not be based on only in bibliometric measure, but in the association of various parameters. The impact factor and the H index is mainly based on the number of citations of scientific papers, and this parameter, although important, should not be used alone, nor overvalued in the evaluation of teaching merit.

scholarly journals Effect of Number of Versions on Receiving High Citations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nader Ale Ebrahim ◽  
Hadi Salehi
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
H Index ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Web

Nowadays, the h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or scholar. The index is based upon the set of the scientist's most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. Besides, the most commonly used measure of journal quality is Impact Factor. This is a number which attempts to measure the impact of a journal in terms of the average number of citations to recent articles published in the journal. So, receiving more citation is very important for authors and journals to get high h-index and impact factor. In this paper, we tried to analyses the effect of the number of available version from the web on receive more citations. We analyzed 10162 papers which are published in Scopus database in year 2010. Then we developed a software to collect the number of citations and versions of each paper from Google Scholar automatically.

scholarly journals Effect of Number of Versions on Receiving High Citations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nader Ale Ebrahim ◽  
Hadi Salehi
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
H Index ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Web

Nowadays, the h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or scholar. The index is based upon the set of the scientist's most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. Besides, the most commonly used measure of journal quality is Impact Factor. This is a number which attempts to measure the impact of a journal in terms of the average number of citations to recent articles published in the journal. So, receiving more citation is very important for authors and journals to get high h-index and impact factor. In this paper, we tried to analyses the effect of the number of available version from the web on receive more citations. We analyzed 10162 papers which are published in Scopus database in year 2010. Then we developed a software to collect the number of citations and versions of each paper from Google Scholar automatically.

The unknown acquaintance, or the impact factor and others

2007 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. 165-171
Author(s):  
Anna Berhidi ◽  
Edit Csajbók ◽  
Lívia Vasas
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Analysis ◽  
Index Number ◽  
Scientific Performance ◽  
H Index ◽  
Master List ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Impact

Nobody doubts the importance of the scientific performance’s evaluation. At the same time its way divides the group of experts. The present study mostly deals with the models of citation-analysis based evaluation. The aim of the authors is to present the background of the best known tool – Impact factor – since, according to the authors’ experience, to the many people use without knowing it well. In addition to the „nonofficial impact factor” and Euro-factor, the most promising index-number, h-index is presented. Finally new initiation – Index Copernicus Master List – is delineated, which is suitable to rank journals. Studying different indexes the authors make a proposal and complete the method of long standing for the evaluation of scientific performance.

scholarly journals Profile of Brazilian scientific production on A/H1N1 pandemic influenza

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 1629-1634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Luchs
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
H1n1 Influenza ◽  
Scientific Production ◽  
Similar Amount ◽  
H1n1 Pandemic ◽  
Public Funds ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact ◽  
Bibliometric Studies ◽  
Made In

In the last few years, bibliometric studies have proliferated, seeking to provide data on world research. This study analyzes the profile of the Brazilian scientific production in the A (H1N1) influenza field between 2009 and 2011. The research was conducted in MEDLINE, SciELO and LILACS databases, selecting papers in which the term "H1N1" and "Brazil" were defined as the main topics. The data were analyzed taking into consideration the Brazilian state and institution in which the articles were produced, the impact factor of the journal and the language. The research revealed 40 documents (27 from MEDLINE, 16 from SciELO and 24 from LILACS). The journal impact factor ranged from 0.0977 to 8.1230. A similar amount of articles were written in English and Portuguese and São Paulo was the most productive state in the country, with 95% of the Brazilian production originating from the Southern and Southeastern regions. Linguistic data indicate that previous efforts made in order to improve the scientific production of Brazilian researchers making their observations attain a broader scientific audience produced results. It is necessary to assess the scientific studies, especially those conducted with public funds, in order to ensure that the results will benefit society.

scholarly journals Quality weighted citations versus total citations in the sciences and social sciences, with an application to finance and accounting

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 324-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chia-Lin Chang ◽  
Michael McAleer
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Additional Measure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Article Influence

Purpose – Both journal self-citations and exchanged citations have the effect of increasing a journal’s impact factor, which may be deceptive. The purpose of this paper is to analyse academic journal quality and research impact using quality-weighted citations vs total citations, based on the widely used Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science citations database (ISI). A new Index of Citations Quality (ICQ) is presented, based on quality-weighted citations. Design/methodology/approach – The new index is used to analyse the leading 500 journals in both the sciences and social sciences, as well as finance and accounting, using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAMs) that are based on alternative transformations of citations. Findings – It is shown that ICQ is a useful additional measure to 2-year impact factor (2YIF) and other well-known RAMs for the purpose of evaluating the impact and quality, as well as ranking, of journals as it contains information that has very low correlations with the information contained in the well-known RAMs for both the sciences and social sciences, and finance and accounting. Practical implications – Journals can, and do, inflate the number of citations through self-citation practices, which may be coercive. Another method for distorting journal impact is through a set of journals agreeing to cite each other, that is, by exchanging citations. This may be less coercive than self-citations, but is nonetheless unprofessional and distortionary. Social implications – The premise underlying the use of citations data is that higher quality journals generally have a higher number of citations. The impact of citations can be distorted in a number of ways, both consciously and unconsciously. Originality/value – Regardless of whether self-citations arise through collusive practices, the increase in citations will affect both 2YIF and 5-year impact factor (5YIF), though not Eigenfactor and Article Influence. This leads to an ICQ, where a higher ICQ would generally be preferred to lower. Unlike 5YIF, which is increased by journal self-citations and exchanged citations, and Eigenfactor and Article Influence, both of which are affected by quality-weighted exchanged citations, ICQ will be less affected by exchanged citations. In the absence of any empirical evidence to the contrary, 5YIF and AI are assumed to be affected similarly by exchanged citations.

scholarly journals Bibliometric analysis of multi-language veterinary journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-353
Author(s):  
Erwin KRAUSKOPF ◽  
Fernanda GARCIA ◽  
Robert FUNK
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Citation Distribution ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Main Language

Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between language and total number of citations found among documents in journals written in English and other languages. We selected all the journals clustered together in the Journal Citation Reports 2014 under the subject category “Veterinary Sciences” and downloaded all the data registered between 1994-2013 by Web of Science for the journals that stated publishing documents in languages other than English. We classified each of these journals by quartile and extracted information regarding their impact factor, language(s) stated, country of origin, total number of documents published, total number of reviews published, percentage of documents published in English and the quartile in which each journal ranked. Of the 48,118 documents published by the 28 journals analyzed, 55.8% were published in English. Interestingly, although most of the journals state being multi-language, most documents published in quartile 1 journals were in English (an average of 99.2%), while the percentage was 93.1% in quartile 2 journals, 62.1% in quartile 3 journals and 27.4% in quartile 4 journals. We also confirmed that citation distribution in these journals was highly skewed. The results of this study suggest that journals should consider adopting English as the main language as this will increase citation counts and the impact factor of the journal.

scholarly journals A Statistical Approach to Model the H-Index Based on the Total Number of Citations and the Duration from the Publishing of the First Article

Complexity ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Mohammad Reza Mahmoudi ◽  
Marzieh Rahmati ◽  
Zulkefli Mansor ◽  
Amirhosein Mosavi ◽  
Shahab S. Band
Keyword(s):  
Nonlinear Regression ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Statistical Approach ◽  
Practical Approach ◽  
H Index ◽  
Model Based ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

The productivity of researchers and the impact of the work they do are a preoccupation of universities, research funding agencies, and sometimes even researchers themselves. The h-index (h) is the most popular of different metrics to measure these activities. This research deals with presenting a practical approach to model the h-index based on the total number of citations (NC) and the duration from the publishing of the first article (D1). To determine the effect of every factor (NC and D1) on h, we applied a set of simple nonlinear regression. The results indicated that both NC and D1 had a significant effect on h ( p  < 0.001). The determination of coefficient for these equations to estimate the h-index was 93.4% and 39.8%, respectively, which verified that the model based on NC had a better fit. Then, to record the simultaneous effects of NC and D1 on h, multiple nonlinear regression was applied. The results indicated that NC and D1 had a significant effect on h ( p  < 0.001). Also, the determination of coefficient for this equation to estimate h was 93.6%. Finally, to model and estimate the h-index, as a function of NC and D1, multiple nonlinear quartile regression was used. The goodness of the fitted model was also assessed.

scholarly journals THE IMPACT OF REGIONAL INEQUALITY ON MIGRATION TRENDS IN LATVIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 79-91
Author(s):  
Anastasija Jeršova ◽  
Iveta Mietule
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Synthesis Method ◽  
Constructive Method ◽  
Territorial Development ◽  
Integral Index ◽  
Index Method ◽  
Regional Inequalities ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

The topic of current research and key findings are topical, taking into the consideration the territorial development tendencies of Latvia, which is characterized by the long-term regional inequalities and the tendencies of the migration of the population. The aim of the research is to analyse the impact of the regional inequalities on the migration tendencies of population in Latvia. The following research methods have been used in the research- logically constructive method, content analysis, monographic method, synthesis method, statistical analysis of interrelations, integral index method. Within the research, by using the selected research methods, authors have evaluated the influence of migration indicators-stimulators and indicators-de-stimulators on the migration trends in Latvia over time.

scholarly journals Understanding citation patterns between impact-factor and blacklisted journals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel Kulczycki ◽  
Marek Hołowiecki ◽  
Zehra Taskin ◽  
Franciszek Krawczyk
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Predatory Journals ◽  
Subject Categories ◽  
Citation Indexes ◽  
Predatory Publishing ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

One of the most fundamental issues in academia today is understanding the differences between legitimate and predatory publishing. While decision-makers and managers consider journals indexed in popular citation indexes such as Web of Science or Scopus as legitimate, they use two blacklists (Beall’s and Cabell’s), one of which has not been updated for a few years, to identify predatory journals. The main aim of our study is to reveal the contribution of the journals accepted as legitimate by the authorities to the visibility of blacklisted journals. For this purpose, 65 blacklisted journals in social sciences and 2,338 Web-of-Science-indexed journals that cited these blacklisted journals were examined in-depth in terms of index coverages, subject categories, impact factors and self-citation patterns. We have analysed 3,234 unique cited papers from blacklisted journals and 5,964 unique citing papers (6,750 citations of cited papers) from Web of Science journals. We found that 13% of the blacklisted papers were cited by WoS journals and 37% of the citations were from impact-factor journals. As a result, although the impact factor is used by decision-makers to determine the levels of the journals, it has been revealed that there is no significant relationship between the impact factor and the number of citations to blacklisted journals. On the other hand, country and author self-citation practices of the journals should be considered. All the findings of this study underline the importance of the second part of this study, which will examine the contents of citations to articles published in predatory journals because understanding the motivations of the authors who cited blacklisted journals is important to correctly understand the citation patterns between impact-factor and blacklisted journals.

scholarly journals Microfracture: State of the Art in Cartilage Surgery?

Cartilage ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Frehner ◽  
Jan P. Benthien
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Yearly Average ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

Objective This study is a literature review from 2010 to 2014 concerning the quality of evidence in clinical trials about microfracture in attempt to repair articular cartilage. We have decided to focus on microfracturing, since this seems to be the best documented technique. Interest in evaluation of publication quality has risen in orthopaedic sports medicine recently. Therefore, we think it is necessary to evaluate recent clinical trials being rated for their evidence-based medicine (EBM) quality. We also compared the mean impact factor of the journals publishing the different studies as an indicator of the study’s citation and evaluated for a change over the studied time frame. Design To measure the EBM level, we applied the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) introduced by Jakobsen. The impact factor, which is a measurement of the yearly average number of citations of articles recently published in that journal, was evaluated according to self-reported values on the corresponding journal’s website. Results We found that the mean CMS has not changed between 2010 and 2014. The mean impact factor has also not changed between 2010 and 2014. The CMS variance was high, pointing to different qualities in the evaluated studies. There is no evidence that microfracturing is superior compared to other cartilage repair procedures. Conclusion Microfracture cannot be seen as an evidence based procedure. Further research needs to be done and a standardization of the operating method is desirable. There need to be more substantial studies on microfracturing alone without additional therapies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document