The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment

Way, Michael; Ahmad, Sharon

doi:10.1242/jcs.134460

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), initiated by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB), together with a group of editors and publishers of scholarly journals, recognizes the need to improve the methods applied to evaluate the outputs of scientific research. The general recommendation is “Do not use journal‐based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist's contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions” (Way & Ahmad, , p. 1903).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of research level and article type on the differences between citation metrics and F1000 recommendations

Tang

2015

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

F1000 recommendations were assessed as a potential data source for research evaluation, but the reasons for differences between F1000 Article Factor (FFa scores) and citations remain unexplored. By linking recommendations for 28,254 publications in F1000 with citations in Scopus, we investigated the effect of research level (basic, clinical, mixed) and article type on the internal consistency of assessments based on citations and FFa scores. The research level has little impact on the differences between the 2 evaluation tools, while article type has a big effect. These 2 measures differ significantly for 2 groups: (a) nonprimary research or evidence-based research are more highly cited but not highly recommended, while (b) translational research or transformative research are more highly recommended but have fewer citations. This can be expected, since citation activity is usually practiced by academic authors while the potential for scientific revolutions and the suitability for clinical practice of an article should be investigated from a practitioners' perspective. We conclude with a recommendation that the application of bibliometric approaches in research evaluation should consider the proportion of 3 types of publications: evidence-based research, transformative research, and translational research. The latter 2 types are more suitable for assessment through peer review. IntroductionMany stakeholders are concerned with how to properly assess the true impact of biomedical research. Investigators and research institutions often assess impact through such simple measures as publications in peer-reviewed journals, the impact factors of those journals, success in acquiring research grants, and the awarding of patents for novel inventions (Dembe, Lynch, Gugiu, & Jackson, 2014). The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), initiated by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB), together with a group of editors and publishers of scholarly journals, recognizes the need to improve the methods applied to evaluate the outputs of scientific research. The general recommendation is "Do not use journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist's contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions" (Way & Ahmad, 2013, p. 1903.Citation analysis, as one of the key methodologies in bibliometrics, has become an important tool for research performance assessment in the biomedical sciences (Du & Tang, 2013;Patel et al., 2011;Walker, Sykes, Hemmelgarn, & Quan, 2010). However, before bibliometric evaluation became widely accepted, peer review was the main tool used for research evaluation. This traditional approach received a new breath of life when the Faculty of 1000 Biology (F1000 Biology) was launched in 2002 to evaluate the quality of biomedical literature through a post-publication peer review system. services were combined in 2009 to form F1000Prime, which has built a peer-nominated globa...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of research level and article type on the differences between citation metrics and F1000 recommendations

Tang

2015

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the moment, no superior metrics are universally accessible for all indexed journals. F1000Prime, which publishes recommendations for articles in biology and medicine, emphasizes the need for editors and experts to evaluate scientific research outputs [47]. A citation analysis is recognized as one of the critical practices in bibliometric evaluation in the biomedical sciences [48,49].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polypharmacy in the elderly: A bibliometric and visualization analysis

Al-Taani,

Al-Azzam,

Alzoubi

et al. 2024

ELECTRON J GEN MED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The incidence of polypharmacy is increasing owing to population aging and the associated presence of multiple comorbidities. This study aimed to provide an extensive overview of the history and development of the scientific literature on polypharmacy. Methods: Data were gathered from the comprehensive Scopus database and assessed using various bibliometric methods, including analyses of citations, growth patterns, and key contributors in the field. Results: A notable upward trend in the publication rate of polypharmacy research was observed throughout the study period (1976-2022). Journal of the American Geriatrics Society emerged as the predominant platform for disseminating polypharmacy-related findings. Hughes CM from Queen’s University Belfast, the United Kingdom (UK), emerged as the most prolific author in this field. Most articles were authored by researchers affiliated with institutions in the United States (n=267), the UK (n=92), and Italy (n=72). Conclusion: This study provides compelling evidence of the escalating interest in polypharmacy and momentum in related research, highlighting the crucial publication-related aspects and indicators in this field. The findings underline the value of bibliometric analyses as a tool for healthcare professionals. The wide dissemination, influence, and visibility of polypharmacy research in reputable scientific journals emphasize the urgent clinical need for addressing polypharmacy concerns and encourage further exploration in this area.

show abstract

“…Lastly, I refer to the San Francisco Declaration [30] and the Leiden Manifesto [31] as worthy efforts to fight against the prevailing avalanche of bibliometric indicators that supposedly measure the performance of scientists and have meretriciously seduced so many of us [32].…”

Section: Use Of Citations In Academic Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Citation Practices on Academic Assessment

Rivera

2022

CAJMHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In writing scientific papers, proper citation and referencing are crucial and thereby should be taught to graduate students and novice researchers as tools for counteracting the pervasive errors in citing, quoting, and referencing. Although the relevance of citation counts and derived indicators such as the h-index in assessing research performance is out of question, this emphasis has resulted in an “impact or perish” culture featuring post-production misrepresentation and related misbehaviors. Herein, I appraise the use of citations in academic assessment, citations in original vs. review articles, convenience and country of origin biases, and some related issues. The current landscape highlights that formal instruction on citation practices and their implications should be included in graduate programs and enduringly reinforced by mentors in laboratories.

show abstract

The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

The effects of research level and article type on the differences between citation metrics and F1000 recommendations

The effects of research level and article type on the differences between citation metrics and F1000 recommendations

Polypharmacy in the elderly: A bibliometric and visualization analysis

Influence of Citation Practices on Academic Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About