A variant of the <i>h</i>‐index to measure recent performance

Schreiber, Michael

doi:10.1002/asi.23438

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[6] The h-index was also compared with 37 variants. [7] New variants of the h-index continue to be proposed, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] and comparisons and evaluations of bibliometric indices have been conducted. [3,15,16] The h-index and its variants, however, do not adequately take into account the full citation sequence of a researcher (e.g., h-index = 10 in 10 articles with the citation-sequence [100, 90, 80., 10]).…”

Section: Variants Of the H-index Proposed In The Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Authors who contributed most to the fields of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis since 2011 using the hT-index: Bibliometric analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The h-index does not take into account the full citation list of a researcher to evaluate individual research achievements (IRAs). As a generalization of the h-index, the hT-index takes all citations into account to evaluate IRAs. Compared to other bibliometric indices, it is unclear whether the hT-index is more closely associated with the h-index. We utilized articles published on hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis (HD/PD) to validate the hT-index as a measure of the most significant contributions to HD/PD.Methods: Using keywords involving HD/PD in titles, subject areas, and abstracts since 2011, we obtained 7702 abstracts and their associated metadata (e.g., citations, authors, research institutes, countries of origin). In total, 4752 first or corresponding authors with hT-indices >0 were evaluated. To present the author's IRA, the following 4 visualizations were used: radar, Sankey, impact beam plot, and choropleth map to investigate whether the hT-index was more closely associated with the h-index than other indices (e.g., g-/x-indices and author impact factors), whether the United States still dominates the majority of publications concerning PD/HD, and whether there was any difference in research features between 2 prolific authors.Results: In HD/PD articles, we observed that (a) the hT-index was closer to and associated with the h-index; (b1) the United States (37.15), China (34.63), and Japan (28.09) had the highest hT-index; (b2) Sun Yat Sen University (Chian) earned the highest hT-index (=20.02) among research institutes; (c1) the authors with the highest hT-indices (=15.64 and 14.39, respectively) were David W Johnson (Australia) and Andrew Davenport (UK); and (c2) their research focuses on PD and HD, respectively. Conclusion:The hT-index was demonstrated to be appropriate for assessing IRAs along with visualizations. The hT-index is recommended in future bibliometric analyses of IRAs as a complement to the h-index.

show abstract

Section: Variants Of the H-index Proposed In The Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…[6] The h-index was also compared with 37 variants. [7] New variants of the h-index continue to be proposed, [8–14] and comparisons and evaluations of bibliometric indices have been conducted. [3,15,16]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authors who contributed most to the fields of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis since 2011 using the hT-index: Bibliometric analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of course, one can apply a longer or shorter time period, but 5 years appear to be a reasonable period. This approach can be extended to the entire career, using a sliding window of t years and calculating the topical index h t for a given year y taking the publications from the previous t years into account . Again, like for the personal impact factor in Figure due to small numbers a time window of 2 years is rather too short to allow a reasonable evaluation.…”

Section: Recent Achievementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bibliometric Epilogue: Measuring the Works of D.R.T. Zahn

Schreiber

2019

Physica Status Solidi (b)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The articles in the present issue show in an impressive way the width and the depth of the works of D.R.T. Zahn. In this epilogue some bibliometric data are compiled in order to provide quantitative measures of the author's work. Traditional indicators like the numbers of publications and received citations are discussed. Web of Science and Google Scholar search results are compared. The index h proposed by Hirsch and several variants of h are determined for Zahn's oeuvre. The claimed predictive power of h is traced to its inert evolution.

show abstract

“…As a numerical value, it is becoming the metric of choice in academic circles for assessment in employment, promotion and fellowship (Kelly and Jennions, 2006, 2007). It is a fact that the h-index is often used for performance evaluations, in appointment processes, as well as to allocate resource grants (Schreiber, 2015; Bornmann and Bauer, 2015) and professional honors (Bornmann and Bauer, 2015). The enormous benefits of the h-index and its impact on the reputation of researchers make it mandatory to keep it under the research radar.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do authors play fair or manipulate Google Scholar h-index?

Loan

Nasreen

Bashir

2021

LHT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe study's main purpose is to scrutinize Google Scholar profiles and find the answer to the question, “Do authors play fair or manipulate Google Scholar Bibliometric Indicators like h-index and i10-index?”Design/methodology/approachThe authors scrutinized the Google Scholar profiles of the top 50 library and science researchers claiming authorship of 21,022 publications. The bibliographic information of all the 21,022 publications like authorship and subject details were verified to identify accuracy, discrepancies and manipulation in their authorship claims. The actual and fabricated entries of all the authors along with their citations were recorded in the Microsoft Office Excel 2007 for further analyses and interpretation using simple arithmetic calculations.FindingsThe results show that the h-index of authors obtained from the Google Scholar should not be approved at its face value as the variations exist in the publication count and citations, which ultimately affect their h-index and i10 index. The results reveal that the majority of the authors have variations in publication count (58%), citations (58%), h-index (42%) and i10-index (54%). The magnitude of variation in the number of publications, citations, h-index and i10-index is very high, especially for the top-ranked authors.Research limitations/implicationsThe scope of the study is strictly restricted to the faculty members of library and information science and cannot be generalized across disciplines. Further, the scope of the study is limited to Google Scholar and caution needs to be taken to extend results to other databases like Web of Science and Scopus.Practical implicationsThe study has practical implications for authors, publishers, and academic institutions. Authors must stop the unethical research practices; publishers must adopt techniques to overcome the problem and academic institutions need to take precautions before hiring, recruiting, promoting and allocating resources to the candidates on the face value of the Google Scholar h-index. Besides, Google needs to work on the weak areas of Google Scholar to improve its efficacy.Originality/valueThe study brings to light the new ways of manipulating bibliometric indicators like h-index, and i10-index provided by Google Scholar using false authorship claims.

show abstract

A variant of the h‐index to measure recent performance

Cited by 13 publications

References 17 publications

Authors who contributed most to the fields of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis since 2011 using the hT-index: Bibliometric analysis

Authors who contributed most to the fields of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis since 2011 using the hT-index: Bibliometric analysis

Bibliometric Epilogue: Measuring the Works of D.R.T. Zahn

Do authors play fair or manipulate Google Scholar h-index?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About