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

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.

Download Full-text

Impact of cytopathology authors work: Comparative analysis based on Open-access cytopathology publications versus non-Open-access conventional publications

CytoJournal ◽

10.25259/cytojournal_32_2021 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 ◽

pp. 20 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Janavi A. Kolpekwar ◽

Vinod B. Shidham

Keyword(s):

Comparative Analysis ◽

Open Access ◽

Citation Analysis ◽

Science Citation ◽

Google Scholar ◽

Free Access ◽

Access Barriers ◽

Journal Articles ◽

Indian Journal ◽

Number Of Citations

Objectives: Open access (OA) is based on a set of principles and a range of practices through which fruits of research are distributed online, free of cost, or other access barriers. According to the 2001 definition, OA publications are without barriers to copy or reuse with free access to readers. Some studies have reported higher rates of citation for OA publications. In this study, we analyzed the citation rates of OA and traditional nonOA (with or without free access) publications for authors publishing in the subspecialty of cytopathology during 2010–2015. Material and Methods: We observed and compared citation patterns for authors who had published in both OA and traditional non-OA, peer-reviewed, scientific, cytopathology journals. Thirty authors were randomly selected with criteria of publishing a total of at least five cytopathology articles over 2010–2015. Number of citations per article (CPA) (during 2010–2015) for OA publications (in CytoJournal and Journal of Cytology) and non-OA publications (in Diagnostic Cytopathology, Cytopathology, Acta Cytologica, Journal of American of Cytopathology, and Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology) was collected and compared statistically using two-tailed Student’s t-est. The data were collected manually through science citation analysis sites, mostly Google Scholar. Results: Thirty authors published 579 cytopathology articles in OA and non-OA journals. Average CPA for OA publications was 26.64. This was 11.35 higher than the average CPA) of non-OA conventional with subscription cytopathology journals (74% increase) and 11.76 higher than the average CPA of conventional cytopathology non-OA journal articles with free access (79% increase). These differences were statistically significantly with P < 0.05. Conclusion: We observed that the cytopathology publications in the OA journal attained a higher rate of CPA than the publications in the traditional non-OA journals in the field of cytopathology during 2010–2015.

Download Full-text

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

Cardiology in the Young ◽

10.1017/s1047951121000597 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Self-Citation Analysis on Google Scholar Dataset for H-Index Corrections

IEEE Access ◽

10.1109/access.2019.2938657 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. 126025-126036

Author(s):

Fiaz Majeed ◽

Muhammad Shafiq ◽

Amjad Ali ◽

Muhammad Awais Hassan ◽

Syed Ali Abbas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Citation Analysis ◽

Google Scholar ◽

H Index

Download Full-text

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

European Scientific Journal ESJ ◽

10.19044/esj.2021.v17n21p316 ◽

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%.

Download Full-text

Scientometric Portrait of Professor K. Byrappa: Scientist of High Repute

Asian Journal of Information Science and Technology ◽

10.51983/ajist-2020.10.2.308 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 15-20

Author(s):

N. Kavitha ◽

M. Chandrashekara

Keyword(s):

Role Model ◽

Research Work ◽

Google Scholar ◽

Scholarly Research ◽

Early Date ◽

H Index ◽

Research Publications

The present study attempted to explore and analyze various attributes of research publications of Prof.K.Byrappa, a renowned Indian academician and researcher. The data used in the study have covered from K. Byrappa’s early date of publication to 13th January 2020, indexed in Google Scholar. A total number of 378 articles have been retrieved from Google Scholar for the said period. His h-index is 31 and received 7774 citations for his scholarly research work. In this study, an attempt has been made to highlight the profile and publications of Prof. K. Byrappa as a role model for future researchers and academicians.

Download Full-text

Effect of Number of Versions on Receiving High Citations

10.36227/techrxiv.12561818.v1 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Archives of Health Science ◽

10.31829/2641-7456/ahs2020-4(1)-119 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Relationship of Google Scholar Versions and Paper Citations

10.20944/preprints201706.0062.v1 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

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.

Download Full-text

Effect of Number of Versions on Receiving High Citations

10.36227/techrxiv.12561818 ◽

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

Download Full-text

Hábitos de publicación de la élite científica de España

Anales de Documentación ◽

10.6018/analesdoc.440101 ◽

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.

Download Full-text