Literature DB >> 23517697

[Google Scholar and the h-index in biomedicine: the popularization of bibliometric assessment].

A Cabezas-Clavijo1, E Delgado-López-Cózar.   

Abstract

The aim of this study is to review the features, benefits and limitations of the new scientific evaluation products derived from Google Scholar, such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations, as well as the h-index, which is the standard bibliometric indicator adopted by these services. The study also outlines the potential of this new database as a source for studies in Biomedicine, and compares the h-index obtained by the most relevant journals and researchers in the field of intensive care medicine, based on data extracted from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Results show that although the average h-index values in Google Scholar are almost 30% higher than those obtained in Web of Science, and about 15% higher than those collected by Scopus, there are no substantial changes in the rankings generated from one data source or the other. Despite some technical problems, it is concluded that Google Scholar is a valid tool for researchers in Health Sciences, both for purposes of information retrieval and for the computation of bibliometric indicators.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier España, S.L. and SEMICYUC. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23517697     DOI: 10.1016/j.medin.2013.01.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Intensiva        ISSN: 0210-5691            Impact factor:   2.491


  6 in total

1.  Bibliometric Analyses of Physical and Occupational Therapy Faculty across Canada Indicate Productivity and Impact of Rehabilitation Research.

Authors:  Joy C MacDermid; Eunice H Fung; Mary Law
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.037

2.  Characterizing scientific production of Italian Oral Surgery professionals through evaluation of bibliometric indices.

Authors:  Stefano Tetè; Vincenzo Luca Zizzari; Alessandro De Carlo; Felice Lorusso; Marta Di Nicola; Adriano Piattelli; Enrico Gherlone; Antonella Polimeni
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2014-03-31

3.  What are the personal and professional characteristics that distinguish the researchers who publish in high- and low-impact journals? A multi-national web-based survey.

Authors:  Carlos Eduardo Paiva; Raphael L C Araujo; Bianca Sakamoto Ribeiro Paiva; Cristiano de Pádua Souza; Flavio Mavignier Cárcano; Marina Moreira Costa; Sérgio Vicente Serrano; João Paulo Nogueira Lima
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2017-02-07

Review 4.  Scientific Production in Dentistry: The National Panorama through a Bibliometric Study of Italian Academies.

Authors:  Felice Lorusso; Francesco Inchingolo; Antonio Scarano
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-08-05       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Comprehensive Researcher Achievement Model (CRAM): a framework for measuring researcher achievement, impact and influence derived from a systematic literature review of metrics and models.

Authors:  Jeffrey Braithwaite; Jessica Herkes; Kate Churruca; Janet C Long; Chiara Pomare; Claire Boyling; Mia Bierbaum; Robyn Clay-Williams; Frances Rapport; Patti Shih; Anne Hogden; Louise A Ellis; Kristiana Ludlow; Elizabeth Austin; Rebecca Seah; Elise McPherson; Peter D Hibbert; Johanna Westbrook
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-30       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Strategies of Elicitation to Enhance Bioactive Compound Content in Edible Plant Sprouts: A Bibliometric Study.

Authors:  María Trinidad Toro; Jaime Ortiz; José Becerra; Nelson Zapata; Paulo Fierro; Marcelo Illanes; María Dolores López
Journal:  Plants (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-14
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.