Bibliometrics: tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics

Abstract

Traditionally, the success of a researcher is assessed by the number of publications he or she publishes in peer-reviewed, indexed, high impact journals. This essential yardstick, often referred to as the impact of a specific researcher, is assessed through the use of various metrics. While researchers may be acquainted with such matrices, many do not know how to use them to enhance their careers. In addition to these metrics, a number of other factors should be taken into consideration to objectively evaluate a scientist's profile as a researcher and academician. Moreover, each metric has its own limitations that need to be considered when selecting an appropriate metric for evaluation. This paper provides a broad overview of the wide array of metrics currently in use in academia and research. Popular metrics are discussed and defined, including traditional metrics and article-level metrics, some of which are applied to researchers for a greater understanding of a particular concept, including varicocele that is the thematic area of this Special Issue of Asian Journal of Andrology. We recommend the combined use of quantitative and qualitative evaluation using judiciously selected metrics for a more objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.

Development of an Eastern Mediterranean Region search strategy for biomedical citations indexed in PubMed

“…In the study period regional publications increased nearly five-fold. Despite their many imperfections, indicators of biomedical bibliometrics offer a means by which countries and regions of varying geographic sizes and socio-economic development may be monitored and compared (17,18).…”

Tendencies on Traditional Metrics

“…ISI acronym comes from the Institute of Scientific Information, founded in 1960 by Garfield and purchased in 1992 by Thompson Reuters (10). As regards the ISI journals, we must make a difference between an ISI-indexed journal and an ISI-rated journal.…”

“…It was proposed by Garfield in 1955, in order to help the librarians evaluate the quality of journals (10,13). Later on, it was adapted in order to be used as a facile method of selecting and indexing journals in the SCI database, founded by Garfield in 1960.…”

“…As principle of calculation, it is based on the number of citations and number of published articles (20), similar to IF.…”

Applying Data Analytics and Visualization to Assessing the Research Impact of the Cancer Cell Biology (CCB) Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

“…Since any significant research activity usually results in publications, bibliometric analysis is a quick, direct, and economical way to measure research output and quality. In addition, researchers generally agree that bibliometric analysis generates objective, sophisticated, quantitative measures of research impact for scientific outputs (Agarwal et al 2016;Rosas, Kagan and Schouten 2011). Even federal funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have mandated publication tracking and reporting as a component for grants renewal (Schneider et al 2017).…”