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.

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.

scholarly journals Depicting developing trend and core knowledge of hip fracture research: a bibliometric and visualised analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanrong Peng ◽  
Zhenhua Guan ◽  
Yunfei Hou ◽  
Jiaxiang Gao ◽  
Wenqun Rao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
High Morbidity ◽  
Core Knowledge ◽  
H Index ◽  
Cooperative Relationships ◽  
Developing Trend ◽  
Number Of Citations

Abstract Background Hip fracture is common and carries high morbidity and mortality; thus, it has become a vital concern. We aim to analyse the present status, worldwide trends in hip fracture and state of clinical research. Methods Publications from 2000 to 2019 were retrieved from the Web of Science database and analysed using a bibliometric methodology. VOSviewer software was utilised for analysis. Results In total, 6139 publications were included, and publications increased annually from 152 in 2000 to 592 in 2019. U.S. researchers have produced the most publications, the highest H-index and the greatest number of citations. Osteoporosis International has published the most papers on the topic. Leading researchers, contributing institutions, their cooperative relationships and scientific masterpieces have been identified. The publications can be divided into five clusters: ‘mortality’, ‘surgical management’, ‘rehabilitation’, ‘osteoporosis’ and ‘epidemiology’. A clear developing trend was described, which began with fracture epidemiology and prevention, transitioned to perioperative management, orthogeriatric care and patient safety and then to functional recovery, disease burden and national audits in recent times. Conclusions Hip fractures result in conditions that extend far beyond orthopaedics concerning epidemiology and preventive medicine, internal medicine and endocrinology, as well as critical care and gerontology. Interest, research and publications are on the rise.

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 Understanding and Evaluating Research and Scholarly Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH)

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Sivertsen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Knowledge Creation ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Empirical Concept ◽  
Complete Representation ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Limited Coverage ◽  
Holistic Manner

Abstract Internationalization is important for research quality and for specialization on new themes in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). Interaction with society, however, is just as important in these areas of research for realizing the ultimate aims of knowledge creation. This article demonstrates how the heterogenous publishing patterns of the SSH may reflect and fulfill both purposes. The limited coverage of the SSH in Scopus and Web of Science is discussed along with ideas about how to achieve a more complete representation of all the languages and publication types that are actually used in the SSH. A dynamic and empirical concept of balanced multilingualism is introduced to support combined strategies for internationalization and societal interaction. The argument is that all the communication purposes in all different areas of research, and all the languages and publication types needed to fulfill these purposes, should be considered in a holistic manner without exclusions or priorities whenever research in the SSH is evaluated.

scholarly journals Challenges of academic and scientific output in the interface between Social and Human Sciences and Food and Nutrition Sciences

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ligia Amparo-Santos ◽  
Micheli Dantas Soares
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Production Of Knowledge ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Methodological Challenges ◽  
The Social ◽  
Food And Nutrition ◽  
Important Challenge

This paper discusses theoretical and methodological challenges in the production of knowledge located in the interface between the Social Sciences and the Sciences of Food and Nutrition, mediated by Health Sciences. We recognize that the discussion on the intersections between these scientific fields arises from the need to expand the understanding of the phenomena surrounding the field of Food and Nutrition from other theoretical frameworks beyond the biomedical paradigm. The discussion will guide a reflection on the following issues: a) how to establish Brazilian academic-scientific output at the interface between the Nutritional Sciences and Social Sciences, mediated by Health Sciences; b) considering that there is a 'field' of the socio-anthropology of food developed historically within the Social Sciences and Humanities, which distinguishes the production of knowledge in the field of health; c) the main theoretical and methodological challenges of academic-scientific output today. We also discuss challenges related to the practical consequences of this output, considering the interventionist legacy in the field of health. Lastly, we highlight that such reflections also face another important challenge, namely the urgent need to reinvent ways of thinking and doing science which, articulated with demands inherent to a new field shaped by the search for production of knowledge and practices, is more important to issues raised by health care.

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 Uso de Scopus y Web of Science para investigar y evaluar en comunicación social: análisis comparativo y caracterización

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-261
Author(s):  
Lluís Codina ◽  
◽  
Alejandro Morales-Vargas ◽  
Ruth Rodríguez-Martínez ◽  
Mario Pérez-Montoro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Information Retrieval ◽  
Social Communication ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Expert Evaluation ◽  
Functional Characteristics ◽  
Detailed Review ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Academic Information ◽  
Specific Impact

The objective is to characterize and compare the options offered by the main databases to researchers in social communication to search and evaluate academic information. To do this, through an expert evaluation, the functional characteristics of Scopus and Web of Science were examined. As a result, a detailed review of dimensions such as coverage, information retrieval and analysis tools of sources and authors present in each one is presented, as well as specific impact metrics. Among the conclusions, similarities are observed in the available functions, but significant differences in the number of journals in the field of social sciences and humanities, which leaves Scopus in a better position in the case of having to choose.

scholarly journals Exploração colaborativa através do compartilhamento de dados de citações do Google Scholar │ Collaborative exploration on citation data sharing in Google Scholar

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiago Rodrigo Marçal Murakami ◽  
Sibele Fausto ◽  
Ronaldo Ferreira de Araújo
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Scientific Collaboration ◽  
Pilot Project ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Citation Data ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Collaborative Exploration ◽  
The Impact

RESUMO A falta de indexação dos títulos de revistas científicas de Ciências Humanas e Sociais em bases de dados comerciais restringe a investigação sobre seu impacto. O Acesso Aberto, ferramentas como o Google Scholar (GS) e aplicativos de processamento de dados permitem a busca e a recuperação de citações de artigos, sinalizando uma alternativa para os estudos sobre o impacto da produção científica publicada nessas áreas. Este estudo apresenta um projeto piloto de compartilhamento de dados de citações de periódicos para a investigação colaborativa por parte da comunidade de cientometria brasileira com o objetivo de incentivar uma maior utilização do GS para fins bibliométricos.Palavras-chave: Dados de Citação; Google Acadêmico; Periódicos Científicos; Colaboração.ABSTRACT The lack of indexing for titles of scientific journals in the Social Sciences and Humanities in commercial databases makes it difficult to carry out an investigation on their impact. Open Access and tools such as Google Scholar (GS) and software for data processing allow search and the recovery of article citations, which can be regarded as an alternative for the studies on the impact of scientific production published in these areas. This study presents a pilot project for sharing citation data from Brazilian journals for further collaborative research by the national scientometrics community with the aim of encouraging greater use of GS for bibliometric purposes.Keywords: Citation Data; Google Scholar; Sharing; Journals; Scientific Collaboration.

scholarly journals The Association Between Professional Accounts on Social Networks Twitter and ResearchGate and the Number of Scientific Publications and Citations Among Anesthesia Researchers: Observational Study (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Clavier ◽  
Emilie Occhiali ◽  
Zoé Demailly ◽  
Vincent Compère ◽  
Benoit Veber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Networks ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
H Index ◽  
The Social ◽  
Twitter Account ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Science Citation Index Expanded

BACKGROUND Social networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers. METHODS We included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index. RESULTS A total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; <i>P</i>=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; <i>P</i>=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; <i>P</i>=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; <i>P</i>=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; <i>P</i>=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). CONCLUSIONS Among French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document