nach oben

Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)

Erschienen in:

03.12.2018 | Review Article

Current concepts on bibliometrics: a brief review about impact factor, Eigenfactor score, CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank, Source-Normalised Impact per Paper, H-index, and alternative metrics

verfasst von: Ernesto Roldan-Valadez, Shirley Yoselin Salazar-Ruiz, Rafael Ibarra-Contreras, Camilo Rios

Erschienen in: Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Understanding the impact of a publication by using bibliometric indices becomes an essential activity not only for universities and research institutes but also for individual academicians. This paper aims to provide a brief review of the current bibliometric tools used by authors and editors and proposes an algorithm to assess the relevance of the most common bibliometric tools to help the researchers select the fittest journal and know the trends of published submissions by using self-evaluation.

Methods

We present a narrative review answering at least two related consecutive questions triggered by the topics mentioned above. How prestigious is a journal based on its most recent bibliometrics, so authors may choose it to submit their next manuscript? And, how can they self-evaluate/understand the impact of their whole publishing scientific life?

Results

We presented the main relevant definitions of each bibliometrics and grouped them in those oriented to evaluated journals or individuals. Also, we share with our readers our algorithm to assess journals before manuscript submission.

Conclusions

Since there is a journal performance market and an article performance market, each one with its patterns, an integrative use of these metrics, rather than just the impact factor alone, might represent the fairest and most legitimate approach to assess the influence and importance of an acceptable research issue, and not only a sound journal in their respective disciplines.

Jones T, Huggett S, Kamalski J (2011) Finding a way through the scientific literature: indexes and measures. World neurosurgery 76(1–2):36–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2011.01.015 CrossRefPubMed

Eyre-Walker A, Stoletzki N (2013) The assessment of science: the relative merits of post-publication review, the impact factor, and the number of citations. PLoS Biol 11(10):e1001675. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001675 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Weinstein JN (2007) Threats to scientific advancement in clinical practice. Spine 32(11 Suppl):S58–S62. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318053d4fc CrossRefPubMed

Gasparyan AY (2010) Thoughts on impact factors and editing of medical journals. Inflamm Allergy Drug Targets 9(1):2–5CrossRefPubMed

Monastersky R (2005) The number that is devouring science. Chron High Educ

de Solla Price DJ (1965) Networks of scientific papers. Science 149(3683):510–515. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3683.510 CrossRef

Bergstrom C (2007) Eigenfactor: measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. Coll Res Libr News 68(5):314–316CrossRef

Davis PM (2002) Where to spend our e-journal money? In: press oHU (ed) defining a university library's core collection through citation analysis, vol 2. Baltimore, USA, pp 155–166

Garfield E (1996) How can impact factors be improved? BMJ 313(7054):411–413CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Schoenbach UH, Garfield E (1956) Citation indexes for science. Science 123(3185):61–62CrossRefPubMed

11.

Adam D (2002) The counting house. Nature 415(6873):726–729. https://doi.org/10.1038/415726a CrossRefPubMed

12.

Parrillo JE (2005) Our journal, critical care medicine, in 2005: high impact factor, rapid manuscript review, growing submissions, and widespread distribution. Crit Care Med 33(5):923–924CrossRefPubMed

13.

Wikipedia (2011) Impact factor. Wikipedia

14.

Mathur VP, Sharma A (2009) Impact factor and other standardized measures of journal citation: a perspective. Indian J Dent Res 20(1):81–85CrossRefPubMed

15.

Thomson_Reuters (2014) Web of Knowledge. http://wokinfo.com. Accessed Accesed 19 May 2014

16.

Kumar V, Upadhyay S, Medhi B (2009) Impact of the impact factor in biomedical research: its use and misuse. Singap Med J 50(8):752–755

17.

Horgan A (2002) BMJ's impact factor increases by 24. BMJ 325(7354):8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Tobin MJ (2004) Thirty years of impact factor and the journal. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 170(4):351–352. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.2406005 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Wedzicha JA, Johnston SL, Mitchell DM (2005) Journal impact factors for 2004: another rise for thorax. Thorax 60(9):712. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.2005.050922 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Rizkallah J, Sin DD (2010) Integrative approach to quality assessment of medical journals using impact factor, eigenfactor, and article influence scores. PLoS One 5(4):e10204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010204 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Thomaz PG, Assad RS, Moreira LF (2011) Using the impact factor and H index to assess researchers and publications. Arq Bras Cardiol 96(2):90–93CrossRefPubMed

22.

Saha S, Saint S, Christakis DA (2003) Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 91(1):42–46PubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Bergstrom CT, West JD, Wiseman MA (2008) The Eigenfactor metrics. J Neurosci 28(45):11433–11434. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0003-08.2008 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Garfield E (1955) Citation indexes for science; a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science 122(3159):108–111CrossRefPubMed

25.

Gisbert JP, Panes J (2009) The Hirsch's h-index: a new tool for measuring scientific production. Cirugia espanola 86(4):193–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ciresp.2009.05.007 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Quindos G (2009) Confusing the confused: thoughts on impact factor, h(irsch) index, Q value, and other cofactors that influence the researcher's happiness. Revista iberoamericana de micologia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Especialistas en Micologia 26(2):97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1130-1406(09)70018-X CrossRef

27.

Kianifar H, Sadeghi R, Zarifmahmoudi L (2014) Comparison between impact factor, eigenfactor metrics, and SCImago journal rank indicator of pediatric neurology journals. Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH 22(2):103–106. https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2014.22.103-106 CrossRef

28.

Ascaso FJ (2011) Impact factor, eigenfactor and article influence. Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia 86(1):1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oftal.2010.12.005 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Seglen PO (1997) Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 314(7079):498–502CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Marashi SA (2005) On the identity of "citers": are papers promptly recognized by other investigators? Med Hypotheses 65(4):822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2005.05.003 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Weale AR, Bailey M, Lear PA (2004) The level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality: a comparison to the impact factor. BMC Med Res Methodol 4:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-4-14 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber E (2002) Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 287(21):2847–2850CrossRefPubMed

33.

Garfield E (2000) Use of journal citation reports and journal performance indicators in measuring short and long term journal impact. Croatian medical journal 41(4):368–374PubMed

34.

Van Noorden R (2016) Controversial impact factor gets a heavyweight rival. Nature 540(7633):325–326. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.21131 CrossRefPubMed

35.

Atayero AA, Popoola SI, Egeonu J, Oludayo O (2018) Citation analytics: data exploration and comparative analyses of CiteScores of open access and subscription-based publications indexed in Scopus (2014-2016). Data Brief 19:198–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.05.005 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Hans Zijlstra RM (2016) CiteScore: a new metric to help you track journal performance and make decisions. https://www.elsevier.com/editors-update/story/journal-metrics/citescore-a-new-metric-to-help-you-choose-the-right-journal

37.

Hale L (2017) Sleep Health receives its first CiteScore. Sleep Health 3(4):225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleh.2017.06.002 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Sterbenc A, Ostrbenk A (2017) Elsevier's CiteScore index values for Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina, Pannonica et Adriatica: a 2016 update. Acta Dermatovenerol Alp Pannonica Adriat 26(3):53PubMed

39.

Vanden Eynde JJ (2017) Pharmaceuticals: impact factor or CiteScore. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 10 (3). doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ph10030061

40.

La Torre G, Sciarra I, Chiappetta M, Monteduro A (2017) New bibliometric indicators for the scientific literature: an evolving panorama. Clin Ter 168(2):e65–e71. https://doi.org/10.7417/CT.2017.1985 CrossRefPubMed

41.

Avena MJ, Barbosa DA (2017) Bibliometric indicators of the nursing journals according to the index databases. Rev Esc Enferm USP 51:e03262. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1980-220x2017014603262 CrossRefPubMed

42.

González-Pereira B, Guerrero-Bote VP, Moya-Anegón F (2010) A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: the SJR indicator. Journal of Informetrics 4(3):379–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.002 CrossRef

43.

Newman MEJ (2010) Networks: an introduction, 1st. edn. Oxford University Press Inc., New YorkCrossRef

44.

SCImago (2007) SJR—SCImago Journal & country rank. http://www.scimagojr.com. Accessed Retrieved 25 Nov 2013

45.

Oosthuizen JC, Fenton JE (2014) Alternatives to the impact factor. Surgeon 12(5):239–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2013.08.002 CrossRefPubMed

46.

ELSEVIER (2018) Source-Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP). https://journalinsights.elsevier.com/journals/0969-806X/snip

47.

Kim K, Chung Y (2018) Overview of journal metrics. Sci Educ 5(1):16–20. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.112 CrossRef

48.

Moed HF (2010) Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. J Inf Secur 4(3):265–277

49.

Elsevier BV (2013) Source Normalized Impact per Paper. http://www.elsevier.com/editors/journal-metrics#metrics-in-scopus. Accessed 24 Nov 2103

50.

Bergstrom CT, West JD (2008) Assessing citations with the eigenfactor metrics. Neurology 71(23):1850–1851. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000338904.37585.66 CrossRefPubMed

51.

von Bohlen Und Halbach O (2011) How to judge a book by its cover? How useful are bibliometric indices for the evaluation of "scientific quality" or "scientific productivity"? Ann Anat 193(3):191–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2011.03.011 CrossRef

52.

Roldan-Valadez E, Rios C (2015) Alternative bibliometrics from impact factor improved the esteem of a journal in a 2-year-ahead annual-citation calculation: multivariate analysis of gastroenterology and hepatology journals. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 27(2):115–122. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000000253 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Diaz-Ruiz A, Orbe-Arteaga U, Rios C, Roldan-Valadez E (2018) Alternative bibliometrics from the web of knowledge surpasses the impact factor in a 2-year ahead annual citation calculation: linear mixed-design models' analysis of neuroscience journals. Neurol India 66(1):96–104. https://doi.org/10.4103/0028-3886.222880 CrossRefPubMed

54.

Roldan-Valadez E, Orbe-Arteaga U, Rios C (2018) Eigenfactor score and alternative bibliometrics surpass the impact factor in a 2-years ahead annual-citation calculation: a linear mixed design model analysis of radiology, nuclear medicine and medical imaging journals. Radiol Med 123(7):524–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-018-0870-y CrossRefPubMed

55.

Bartneck C, Kokkelmans S (2011) Detecting h-index manipulation through self-citation analysis. Scientometrics 87(1):85–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0306-5 CrossRefPubMed

56.

Ouimet M, Bedard PO, Gelineau F (2011) Are the H-index and some of its alternatives discriminatory of epistemological beliefs and methodological preferences of faculty members? The case of social scientists in Quebec. Scientometrics 88(1):91–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0364-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Purvis A (2006) The H index: playing the numbers game. Trends Ecol Evol 21(8):422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.05.014 CrossRefPubMed

58.

Fernandez-Llimos F (2018) Differences and similarities between journal impact factor and CiteScore. Pharm Pract (Granada) 16(2):1282. https://doi.org/10.18549/PharmPract.2018.02.1282 CrossRef

59.

Agarwal A, Durairajanayagam D, Tatagari S, Esteves SC, Harlev A, Henkel R, Roychoudhury S, Homa S, Puchalt NG, Ramasamy R, Majzoub A, Ly KD, Tvrda E, Assidi M, Kesari K, Sharma R, Banihani S, Ko E, Abu-Elmagd M, Gosalvez J, Bashiri A (2016) Bibliometrics: tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics. Asian journal of andrology 18(2):296–309. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682x.171582 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Cooper ID (2015) Bibliometrics basics. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 103(4):217–218. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.013 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Garcia-Pachon E, Arencibia-Jorge R (2014) A comparison of the impact factor and the SCImago journal rank index in respiratory system journals. Arch bronconeumol 50(7):308–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arbres.2013.10.006 CrossRefPubMed

62.

Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(46):16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Salgado JF, Paez D (2007) Scientific productivity and Hirsch's h index of Spanish social psychology: convergence between productivity indexes and comparison with other areas. Psicothema 19(2):179–189PubMed

64.

Wikipedia (2011) H-index. Wikipedia

65.

Hirsch JE (2007) Does the H index have predictive power? Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104(49):19193–19198. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707962104 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Kulasegarah J, Fenton JE (2010) Comparison of the H index with standard bibliometric indicators to rank influential otolaryngologists in Europe and North America. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 267(3):455–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-009-1009-5 CrossRefPubMed

67.

Iglesias JE, Pecharromán C (2007) Scaling the h-index for different scientific ISI field. Scientometrics 73(3):303–320CrossRef

68.

Harzing AW (2007) Publish or perish, . Available from:http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm

69.

Egghe L (2006) Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics 69(1):131–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 CrossRef

70.

Woeginger GJ (2008) An axiomatic analysis of Egghe’s g-index. Journal of Informetrics 2:364–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.05.002 CrossRef

71.

Serenko A (2010) The development of an AI journal ranking based on the revealed preference approach. Journal of Informetrics 4(4):447–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.04.001 CrossRef

72.

Sidiropoulos A, Katsaros D, Manolopoulos Y (2007) Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics 72(2):253–280CrossRef

73.

Zhang CT (2009) The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PLoS One 4(5):e5429. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005429 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

74.

Dodson MV (2009) Citation analysis: maintenance of h-index and use of e-index. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 387(4):625–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2009.07.091 CrossRefPubMed

75.

Jin B (2007) The AR-index: complementing the H-index. ISSI Newsletter 3(1):6

76.

Schreiber M (2008) To share the fame in a fair way, HM modifies H for multi-authored manuscripts. New J Phys 10(040201):9. https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/10/4/040201 CrossRef

77.

Ruiz MA (2014) Goals, globalization and the impact factor of the journal. Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter 36(2):93–95. https://doi.org/10.5581/1516-8484.20140019 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

78.

Olff M (2014) Are we happy with the impact factor? Eur J Psychotraumatol 5:26084. https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v5.26084 CrossRef

79.

Altmetric (2013) What does altmetric do? http://support.altmetric.com/knowledgebase/articles/83246-altmetric-for-scopus. Accessed 24 Nov 2013

80.

Elsevier BV (2013) Altmetrics. http://www.elsevier.com/editors/journal-metrics#metrics-in-scopus. Accessed 24 Nov 2013

81.

Schmid SL (2017) Five years post-DORA: promoting best practices for research assessment. Mol Biol Cell 28(22):2941–2944. https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E17-08-0534 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

82.

Titel: Current concepts on bibliometrics: a brief review about impact factor, Eigenfactor score, CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank, Source-Normalised Impact per Paper, H-index, and alternative metrics
verfasst von: Ernesto Roldan-Valadez
Shirley Yoselin Salazar-Ruiz
Rafael Ibarra-Contreras
Camilo Rios
Publikationsdatum: 03.12.2018
Verlag: Springer London
Erschienen in: Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0021-1265
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-4362
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1936-5

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

25.04.2024 | Hypotonie | Nachrichten

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Current concepts on bibliometrics: a brief review about impact factor, Eigenfactor score, CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank, Source-Normalised Impact per Paper, H-index, and alternative metrics

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Niedriger diastolischer Blutdruck erhöht Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

Viel Bewegung in der Parkinsonforschung

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

Update Innere Medizin

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

Profiling frequent attenders at an inner city emergency department

Burning mouth syndrome—a diagnostic dilemma

Migration to aphakia and contact lens treatment is the trend in the management of unilateral congenital cataract in Britain and Ireland

EU anti-smoking graphic warnings on cigarette packets: semiotics and the issue of gender under-representation

Obesity cardiomyopathy: the role of obstructive sleep apnea and obesity hypoventilation syndrome

Critical biochemistry values and patient safety in primary care

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Niedriger diastolischer Blutdruck erhöht Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

Viel Bewegung in der Parkinsonforschung

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

Update Innere Medizin