scholarly journals Use Of Altmetric And Bibliometric Indicators To Measure Scientific Productivity In The Fields Of Life And Earth Sciences: Case Study From Haiti

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (21) ◽  
pp. 316
Author(s):  
Jasmine Césars ◽  
Magline Alexis ◽  
Evens Emmanuel
Keyword(s):  
Rank Correlation ◽  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Quantitative Information ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Bibliometric Indicators ◽  
H Index ◽  
Environment And Health ◽  
Normality Test ◽  
Kolmogorov Smirnov ◽  
Number Of Citations

The objective of this study was to carry out, based on certain bibliometric and altimetric indicators, a summary assessment of the scientific productivity of Quisqueya University’s researchers in 3 specific fields: agronomy, the environment and health. An experimental framework was designed and implemented based on the quantitative information available on the academic social network ResearchGate, and on SCOPUS and Google scholar, out of a total of 12,731 citations enumerated for Quisqueya University as of December 31, 2020, 19% were for the environment, 19.3% were for health, 59.9% for agronomy and 1.8% for other sectors. All the sectors recorded a significant increase for the RG score altmetric indicator and for the two bibliometric indicators: number of citations and H-index. The data collected were analyzed using XLSTAT and R software. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test was applied for each of the indicators. Pearson's rank correlation was used to calculate the correlations between the altmetric indicator (RG-Score) from ResearchGate and the bibliometric indicators (citation and H-index) from Google Scholar and Scopus. A significant positive correlation of α = 0.918 was observed between the number of citations on ResearchGate and on Google Scholar. a result in the same direction (α = 0.991) is also observed between the number of citations on ResearchGate and on Scopus. These correlations allow us to conclude that the work of these researchers was cited in publications published in journals referenced in the Web of Science by a rate exceeding 90%.

scholarly journals Research and Writing Activities in the Field of Sport Science Publishing in Montenegro

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 3-7
Author(s):  
Juel Jarani ◽  
◽  
Srdjan Redzepagic ◽  
Izet Bajramovic ◽  
Fitim Arifi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Web Of Science ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
H Index ◽  
Sport Science ◽  
Sports Science ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Sports Sciences

The goal of this study is to analyse the scientific productivity of Montenegrin researchers in the field of sports sciences, as well as the trend of publishing in Montenegrin sports sciences journals. The research covers studies with a focus on the sports sciences issues published in the period from 2002 to 2019. Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science (the electronic databases) were searched for articles available until September 22, 2021. Results were summarized according to the instructions of PRISMA guidelines and present the number of citations, h-index, i10-index and the number of articles by the authors. The study results shows that researchers from the field of sports sciences publish multiple publications in 2021 compared to 2002. In Google scholar database citation rate is highest, and span from 596 and 14959. On the other side, the same researchers were cited quite less in Scopus and Web of Science databases. When we talk about Montenegrin journals, three are registered in the Google Scholar Database. The Sport Mont journal is the most cited one with the highest h-index (44); the Montenegrin Journal of Sports Science and Medicine is the best ranked Montenegrin journal according to the bibliometric data from the Scopus and Web of Science databases; the Journal of Anthropology of Sport and Physical Education have constant progress in the last years. It was indicated the highest impact was recognized in the last four years, according to citations of available articles published by Montenegrin authors. Also, the number of published articles in the last four year is significant, and progress can be expected in the future.

Publishing patterns and citation performance of manuscripts relating to paediatric cardiology and congenital heart disease: comparison of paediatric and adult cardiology journals

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Rohit S. Loomba ◽  
Danielle Sheikholeslami ◽  
Aaron Dyson ◽  
Saul Flores ◽  
Enrique Villarreal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Lower Number ◽  
The Other ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
H Index ◽  
Paediatric Cardiology ◽  
Number Of Citations

Abstract Background: Manuscripts pertaining to paediatric cardiology and CHD have been published in a variety of different journals. Some of these journals are journals dedicated to paediatric cardiology, while others are focused on adult cardiology. Historically, it has been considered that manuscripts published in journals devoted to adult cardiology have greater citation potential. Our objective was to compare citation performance between manuscripts related to paediatric cardiology and CHD published in paediatric as opposed to adult cardiology journals. Methods: We identified manuscripts related to paediatric cardiology and CHD published in five journals of interest during 2014. Of these journals, two were primarily concerned with adult cardiology, while the other three focused on paediatric cardiology. The number of citations for these identified manuscripts was gathered from Google Scholar. We compared the number of citations (median, mean, and 25th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles), the potential for citation, and the h-index for the identified manuscripts. Results: We identified a total of 828 manuscripts related to paediatric cardiology and congenital heart as published in the 5 journals during 2014. Of these, 783 (95%) were published in journals focused on paediatric cardiology, and the remaining 45 (5%) were published in journals focused on adult cardiology. The median number of citations was 41 in the manuscripts published in the journals focused on adult cardiology, as opposed to 7 in journals focused on paediatric cardiology (p < 0.001). The h-index, however, was greater for the journals dedicated to paediatric cardiology (36 versus 27). Conclusion: Approximately one-twentieth of the work relating to paediatric cardiology and CHD is published in journals that focus predominantly on adult cardiology. The median number of citations is greater when manuscripts concerning paediatric cardiology and CHD are published in these journals focused on adult cardiology. The h-index, however, is higher when the manuscripts are published in journals dedicated to paediatric cardiology. While such publications in journals that focus on adult cardiology tend to generate a greater number of citations than those achieved for works published in specialised paediatric cardiology journals, the potential for citation is no different between the journals. Due to the drastically lower number of manuscripts published in journals dedicated to adult cardiology, however, median performance is different.

scholarly journals The Scientific Productivity and Academic Output of Elite Iraqi Pediatricians: H-Index Reliability Indicators.

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Keyword(s):  
Web Sites ◽  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Second Step ◽  
H Index ◽  
Reliability Indicators

Abstract Background: The scientific productivity and academic output of elite Iraqi pediatricians as measured by bibliometric parameters has become of increased interest. The aim of this study is to evaluate the scientific productivity and academic output of Iraqi pediatricians who have H-index of 10 or higher. Materials and methods: The first step of this research was to determine the Iraqi pediatricians who have H-index of 10 or more at Google Scholar Citation by examining more than 300 profiles of Iraqi authors on the 16th and 17th of August, 2019. The second step was to study the H-index and scientific productivity and academic output of the authors found at other web sites such as the Scopus and Publons. Results: Initially, three Iraqi pediatricians were found to have H-index of 10 at Google Scholar Citation and no Iraqi pediatrician having H-index of more than 10 was found. However, one of the Iraqi pediatricians “Mahmood Dhahir Al-Mendalawi” received citations for articles not authored by him and his profile contained articles not authored by him. His actual H-index was definitely less than 10 and his Scopus H-index was 3. Therefore, only 2 Iraqi pediatricians who actually have H-index of 10 were found. Aamir Al-Mosawi who also has H-index at Scopus of 8 and at Publons of 6 and Mazin Faisal Al-Jadiry who has H-index at Scopus of 6, but has no profile or H-index at Publons. Conclusion: This is the very first study evaluating the scientific productivity and academic output of elite Iraqi pediatricians. When evaluating the H-index of an author at Google Scholar Citation, it is necessary to check the main articles contributing to the H-index of the author are actually belongs to him or her. A very low Scopus H-index is a good indicator to check the accuracy of citation calculation at Google Scholar Citation.

Mapping of Research in Agricultural Scientist’s Citation Analysis in Google Scholar, Scopus and Publons

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-30
Author(s):  
M. Sankar
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Citation Analysis ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Quality Parameters ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
End User ◽  
H Index ◽  
Innovative Idea ◽  
User Groups ◽  
Number Of Citations

An innovative idea developed by the researchers should reach the end user groups. The output of any researcher can be judged in terms of patents or his publications in the respective fields. Quality and impact of research work can be based on the citation and h index. Nowadays, there are several parameters considered for evaluating the performance of the research. Citation and h index are the quality parameters used for rating the originality and use of research. They are more useful for accessing the potentials of research as well as for providing a platform for collaborative projects at national / International levels. This paper presents the comparative analysis of citation and h index for identified researcher through three popular databases viz., Google Scholar, Scopus, and Publons. Among the three databases, Google Scholar showed a higher number of citations of the selected author due to data collected from unauthenticated documents as well as well established research databases.

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 A Corrected H-Index for Academic Leadership Determination: A Bibliographic Research

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Keyword(s):  
Research Group ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Academic Leadership ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Minor Role ◽  
H Index ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Medical Leadership ◽  
Number Of Citations

Background: Academic medical leadership is closely related to scientific research productivity and publication. A researcher’s h-index is based on his/her most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other’s publications. It is generally determined by knowing the number of articles written by the author indexed in citation databases. An H-index will be 10 if 10 articles have received at least 10 citations. Ignoring the order and authorship role of an individual researcher may lead to rather a misleading H-index that is totally not relevant to academic leadership determination. The publishing of research conducted by a large collaborative research group made many collaborators with minor role in research creation, development and leadership obtain a high misleading H-index and is not correlated with their academic and research prowess. The use of methods that increase the reliability of the H-index has been increasingly recommended. The aim of this paper is to describe the determination of a more accurate, non-misleading H-index that is more relevant to academic leadership determination. Materials and Methods: An author was found to have an extremely misleading H-index of 28 at Google Scholar citation that is not relevant to academic leadership deterioration. The papers’ citations in his profile were assessed and a corrected rational non-misleading H-index was determined. Results: The author name was not among the first five authors for the first 20 papers listed by Google Scholar Citation, and in most of these papers, his name was not present among the first ten authors. The author name appears among the first three authors in 9 papers (Number 27, 28,29, 36, 41, 43, 45, 47, 50) as listed by Google Scholar Citation. These papers has 34, 30, 21, 10, 5, 5,4,4,3 citations respectively. The author real H-index is 5; because he has at least 5 papers having five citations (Number 27, 28, 29, 36, 41, 43). Conclusion: The corrected H-index should be calculated while considering the papers really authored by an individual author who should be among the first three authors. Many authors who join a large collaborative research group will generally have a minor contribution to research development and publication, but they may achieve a rather misleading high H-index. It is recommended that Google Scholar Citation adopt the corrected H-index to guarantee the reliability and usefulness of the H-index.

scholarly journals Relationship of Google Scholar Versions and Paper Citations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjan Mohammadjafari ◽  
Hadi Salehi ◽  
Kaveh Bakhtiyari ◽  
Nader Ale Ebrahim ◽  
Mahmoud Danaee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Google Scholar ◽  
Spearman Correlation ◽  
H Index ◽  
Scholarly Publications ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Quality Of Research

The number of citations that a paper has received is the most commonly used indicator to measure the quality of research. Researchers, journals, and universities want to receive more citations for their scholarly publications to increase their h-index, impact factor, and ranking respectively. In this paper, we tried to analyses the effect of the number of available Google Scholar versions of a paper on citations count. We analyzed 10,162 papers which are published in Scopus database in year 2010 by Malaysian top five universities. Then we developed a software to collect the number of citations and versions of each paper from Google Scholar automatically. The result of spearman correlation coefficient revealed that there is positive significant association between the number of Google Scholar versions of a paper and the number of times a paper has been cited.

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 The Correlation between Conservation Knowledge and Fisherman Perception about Mangrove Plantation Activities on Kampung Garapan, Desa Tanjung Pasir, Tangerang

Biosfer ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-14
Author(s):  
Siti Hadianti ◽  
Eka Putri Azrai ◽  
Paskal Sukandar
Keyword(s):  
Rank Correlation ◽  
Simple Random Sampling ◽  
Correlation Study ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Homogeneity Test ◽  
Normality Test ◽  
Kolmogorov Smirnov ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Descriptive Survey ◽  
Method Of Correlation

Mangrove is a coastal ecosystem that has been severely damaged because of irresponsible people. One of the ways to overcome this problem is by carrying out mangrove plantation program. Conservation knowledge is important to form a good perception about the activity. This research was aimed to know the correlation between conservation knowledge and fisherman perception about mangrove plantation activity. It was held on Kampung Garapan, Desa Tanjung Pasir, Tangerang, Banten on June 2012 using a descriptive survey method of Correlation Study. A total of 40 fishermen were selected by simple random sampling. Instruments of conservation knowledge test and fisherman perception were used to obtain data. The mean score of conservation knowledge and fisherman perception were 81.75 and 69.02, respectively. Prerequisite test using normality test of kolmogorov-Smirnov showed a normal result while homogeneity test of F-test showed a non homogenous data. The Spearman Rank correlation coefficient was 0.049 showing a very weak correlation. As the result, it can be concluded that there was a correlation between conservation knowledge and fisherman perception about the mangrove plantation activities.

scholarly journals Hábitos de publicación de la élite científica de España

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
José Antonio Salvador-Oliván ◽  
Gonzalo Marco-Cuenca ◽  
Rosario Arquero-Avilés
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Particle Physics ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
H Index ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Publication Data ◽  
Number Of Citations

El objetivo de este estudio consiste en analizar los patrones de autoría y hábitos de publicación de los investigadores de España más productivos y/o citados. Método: Se han seleccionado los investigadores españoles o que trabajan en instituciones españolas, con mayor índice H y número de citas recibidas en Google Scholar (GS) a partir del Webometrics Ranking of World Universities. Los datos de las publicaciones se han obtenido de la colección principal de Web of Science (WOS). Resultados y conclusiones: La productividad e impacto de los investigadores en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades es mucho menor en la base de datos WOS que en GS. Como autores hiperprolíficos destacan los investigadores en el campo de Física de Partículas, donde es habitual la publicación de 90 artículos al año firmados por más de 2000 autores. Los investigadores de Ciencias de la Salud también son altamente productivos y en multiautoría. This paper aims to analyze the authorship patterns and publication habits of the most productive and / or cited researchers in Spain. Method: Spanish researchers or those who work in Spanish institutions with the highest H index and number of citations received in Google Scholar (GS) have been selected from the Webometrics Ranking of World Universities. Publication data was obtained from the main Web of Science (WOS) collection. Results and conclusions: The productivity and impact of researchers in Social Sciences and Humanities is much less in the WOS database than in GS. As hyperprolific authors highlight researchers in the field of Particle Physics, where the publication of 90 articles per year signed by more than 2000 authors is common. To a lesser extent, Health Sciences researchers are also highly productive in multi-author.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document