Bibliometric indicators: quality measurements of scientific publication.

Bibliometrics is a set of mathematical and statistical methods used to analyze and measure the quantity and quality of books, articles, and other forms of publications. There are three types of bibliometric indicators: quantity indicators, which measure the productivity of a particular researcher; quality indicators, which measure the quality (or "performance") of a researcher's output; and structural indicators, which measure connections between publications, authors, and areas of research. Bibliometric indicators are especially important for researchers and organizations, as these measurements are often used in funding decisions, appointments, and promotions of researchers. As more and more scientific discoveries occur and published research results are read and then quoted by other researchers, bibliometric indicators are becoming increasingly important. This article provides an overview of the currently used bibliometric indicators and summarizes the critical elements and characteristics one should be aware of when evaluating the quantity and quality of scientific output.

[1]  Eugene Garfield,et al.  New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing , 1963 .

[2]  D J PRICE,et al.  NETWORKS OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS. , 1965, Science.

[3]  A. Pritchard,et al.  Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics , 1969 .

[4]  F S Chew,et al.  How research becomes knowledge in radiology: an analysis of citations to published papers. , 1988, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  Financial support for research in radiology: a survey of original investigations published in the AJR and Radiology. , 1994, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  P. Seglen,et al.  Education and debate , 1999, The Ethics of Public Health.

[7]  Richard Smith,et al.  Journal accused of manipulating impact factor , 1997 .

[8]  Clara Lowy.  Impact factor limits funding , 1997, The Lancet.

[9]  E. Garfield.  Journal impact factor: a brief review. , 1999, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[10]  Amount of research interest in rare and common neurological conditions: bibliometric study , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  G H Whitehouse,et al.  Citation rates and impact factors: should they matter? , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[12]  J. Neuberger,et al.  Impact factors: uses and abuses , 2002, European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology.

[13]  H. Moed.  The impact-factors debate: the ISI's uses and limits , 2002, Nature.

[14]  Lee F Rogers,et al.  Impact factor: the numbers game. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  Tsuguya Fukui,et al.  A decline in the U.S. share of research articles. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  D. Christakis,et al.  Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? , 2003, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[17]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Development and application of journal impact measures in the Dutch science system , 2002, Scientometrics.

[18]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Corruption of journal Impact Factors. , 2005, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[19]  J. Pile-Spellman,et al.  Factors associated with academic radiology research productivity. , 2005, Radiology.

[20]  Mahbubur Rahman,et al.  Research articles published in clinical radiology journals: trend of contribution from different countries. , 2005, Academic radiology.

[21]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications , 1995, Scientometrics.

[22]  Peng Dong,et al.  The "impact factor" revisited , 2005, Biomedical digital libraries.

[23]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? , 2005, Scientometrics.

[24]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[25]  W. Glänzel,et al.  A Hirsch-type index for journals [1] , 2005 .

[26]  Péter Jacsó,et al.  Dubious hit counts and cuckoo's eggs , 2006, Online Inf. Rev..

[27]  Mônica G. Campiteli,et al.  Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? , 2006, Scientometrics.

[28]  Lokman I. Meho,et al.  Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science , 2007, Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.

[29]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Is it better or just the same? Article identification strategies impact bibliometric assessments , 2006, Scientometrics.

[30]  E. Garfield.  Citation indexes for science. A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. 1955. , 1955, International journal of epidemiology.

[31]  Leo Egghe,et al.  An informetric model for the Hirsch-index , 2006, Scientometrics.

[32]  Mabel Chew,et al.  Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views. , 2007, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[33]  Ian Rowlands,et al.  The missing link: journal usage metrics , 2007, Aslib Proc..

[34]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Lifting the crown - citation z-score , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[35]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  What do we know about the h index? , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[36]  Impact of the National Institutes of Health on radiology research. , 2008, Radiology.

[37]  Carl T. Bergstrom,et al.  Assessing citations with the Eigenfactor™ Metrics , 2008, Neurology.

[38]  Carl T. Bergstrom,et al.  The Eigenfactor™ Metrics , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[39]  Péter Jacsó,et al.  Journal Citation Reports.">Five-year impact factor data in the Journal Citation Reports , 2009, Online Inf. Rev..