Evaluating the Metrics of Research Performance in H-Index and Scientific Quality Index among Indian Dental Researchers

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

Scientometric Analysis of the Research Output of Physics and Astronomy of Guru Nanak Dev University during 2006-15

DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology ◽

10.14429/djlit.37.10683 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 37 (5) ◽

pp. 337

Author(s):

Sunaina Khanna ◽

Neeraj Kumar Singh ◽

Deepika Tewari ◽

Harinder Singh Saini

Keyword(s):

Research Productivity ◽

Research Output ◽

Citation Impact ◽

Scientometric Analysis ◽

H Index ◽

Average Citation ◽

Publication Number ◽

International Collaborations ◽

The University ◽

Number Of Citations

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The study attempts to analyse research contributions of the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar in physics and astronomy during the period 2006-15. The data for this study was extracted from Scopus. The study analyses the </span><span>year-wise research productivity, national and international collaborations, top collaborating institutions, most prolific </span><span>authors, journals used for communication, most preferred journals for publication, number of citations received by the University during the period under study. This paper analyses that the university has published 652 papers in physics and astronomy. The University had registered the average citation impact per paper of 7.01 per cent and 6 publications received 51 to 100 citations. Among the Indian universities, University stood at 23</span><span>rd </span><span>rank in term of publications output (652) and h-index (29), 16</span><span>th </span><span>rank in average citation per paper (7.01 per cent) and 18</span><span>th </span><span>rank in share of high cited papers (1 per cent) and 19</span><span>th </span><span>rank in terms of international collaborative papers (27.45 per cent) during 2006-15. Around 68.71 per cent publications of the University in physics and astronomy were in national collaboration between GNDU and several other Indian organisations. The study clearly indicates that journals are the most preferred form of publication to communicate research works by the researchers. </span></p></div></div></div>

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

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

Asian Journal of Information Science and Technology ◽

10.51983/ajist-2019.9.2.282 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Scientific Quality Index: a composite size-independent metric compared with h-index for 480 medical researchers

Scientometrics ◽

10.1007/s11192-019-03078-z ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 119 (2) ◽

pp. 1009-1016

Author(s):

W. Pluskiewicz ◽

B. Drozdzowska ◽

P. Adamczyk ◽

K. Noga

Keyword(s):

Quality Index ◽

Scientific Quality ◽

H Index ◽

Medical Researchers

Download Full-text

Global research productivity of N-acetylcysteine use in paracetamol overdose

Human & Experimental Toxicology ◽

10.1177/0960327114565494 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 34 (10) ◽

pp. 1006-1016 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

SH Zyoud ◽

SW Al-Jabi ◽

WM Sweileh ◽

R Awang ◽

WS Waring

Keyword(s):

Research Productivity ◽

Research Output ◽

The United States ◽

Scientific Output ◽

Paracetamol Overdose ◽

Research Activity ◽

H Index ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Number Of Citations ◽

Bibliometric Studies

Purpose: The main objective of this study was to examine the publication pattern of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) research output for paracetamol overdose at the global level. Methods: Data were searched for documents that contained specific words regarding NAC and paracetamol as keywords in the title and/or abstract and/or keywords. Scientific output was evaluated based on a methodology developed and used in other bibliometric studies. Research productivity was adjusted to the national population and nominal gross domestic product per capita. Results: The criteria were met by 367 publications from 33 countries. The highest number of articles associated with the use of NAC in paracetamol overdose was from the United States of America (USA; 39.78%), followed by the United Kingdom (UK; 11.99%). After adjusting for economy and population power, USA (2.822), Iran (1.784) and UK (1.125) had the highest research productivity. The total number of citations at the time of data analysis (14 March 2014) was 8785 with an average of 23.9 citations per document and a median (interquartile range) of 6 (1–22). The h-index of the retrieved documents was 48. The highest h-index was 32 for USA, followed by 20 for UK. Furthermore, the highest number of collaborations with international authors for each country was held by USA with 11 countries, followed by Canada with 7 countries. Conclusion: The amount of NAC-based research activity was low in some countries, and more effort is needed to bridge this gap and to promote better evaluation of NAC use worldwide. Our findings demonstrate that NAC use for paracetamol overdose remains a hot issue in scientific research and may have a larger audience compared with other toxicological aspects. Editors and authors in the field of toxicology might usefully promote the submission of work on NAC in future to improve their journal’s impact.

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

Scientometric Analysis of the Research Output of Physics and Astronomy of Guru Nanak Dev University during 2006-15

DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology ◽

10.14429/djlit.37.5.10683 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 37 (5) ◽

pp. 337

Author(s):

Sunaina Khanna ◽

Neeraj Kumar Singh ◽

Deepika Tewari ◽

Harinder Singh Saini

Keyword(s):

Research Productivity ◽

Research Output ◽

Citation Impact ◽

Scientometric Analysis ◽

H Index ◽

Average Citation ◽

Publication Number ◽

International Collaborations ◽

The University ◽

Number Of Citations

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The study attempts to analyse research contributions of the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar in physics and astronomy during the period 2006-15. The data for this study was extracted from Scopus. The study analyses the </span><span>year-wise research productivity, national and international collaborations, top collaborating institutions, most prolific </span><span>authors, journals used for communication, most preferred journals for publication, number of citations received by the University during the period under study. This paper analyses that the university has published 652 papers in physics and astronomy. The University had registered the average citation impact per paper of 7.01 per cent and 6 publications received 51 to 100 citations. Among the Indian universities, University stood at 23</span><span>rd </span><span>rank in term of publications output (652) and h-index (29), 16</span><span>th </span><span>rank in average citation per paper (7.01 per cent) and 18</span><span>th </span><span>rank in share of high cited papers (1 per cent) and 19</span><span>th </span><span>rank in terms of international collaborative papers (27.45 per cent) during 2006-15. Around 68.71 per cent publications of the University in physics and astronomy were in national collaboration between GNDU and several other Indian organisations. The study clearly indicates that journals are the most preferred form of publication to communicate research works by the researchers. </span></p></div></div></div>

Download Full-text

The H-index in Life and Health Sciences: Advantages, Drawbacks and Challenging Opportunities

Current Drug Research Reviews ◽

10.2174/258997751102191111141801 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 82-84 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Ricardo Jorge Dinis-Oliveira

Keyword(s):

Estimation Method ◽

Health Sciences ◽

Scientific Output ◽

Scientific Publications ◽

Simple Modification ◽

H Index ◽

Number Of Publications ◽

Number Of Citations ◽

Scientific Achievements

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the number of scientific publications. The h-index offers a consistent estimation method about a researcher’s overall scientific achievements since it combines the total number of publications (i.e., productivity) and the number of citations (i.e., quality of those publications). In other words, the h-index is intended to measure simultaneously the quality and quantity of scientific output in a cumulative approach and does not provide data regarding the recent productivity. This editorial presents advantages and limitations of h-index that all researchers in health sciences need to be aware of, especially if this metric is used for professional progression, and discusses the simple modification indexed to “academic/scientific age”. It is obvious that no single metric is perfect, and the use of two or more metrics is more prone to success.

Download Full-text