Leveraging journal citation-based metrics for enhanced university rankings methodology DOI Creative Commons

Ali Mohammad Ghaddar,

Sergio Thoumi,

Samer S. Saab

et al.

Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 9

Published: Dec. 18, 2024

This paper proposes a novel framework for evaluating research performance in university rankings, utilizing journal citation-based metrics and scholarly output instead of traditional article citation metrics. Through correlation analysis, we compare the proposed with used by prominent ranking systems (THE QS) demonstrate significantly higher correlations established rankings (QS, THE, ARWU). The exhibit robustness over time offer fairer evaluation emphasizing objective mitigating biases. provides institutions more accurate benchmarking tool to inform strategic decisions resource allocation. While acknowledging potential limitations data availability challenge achieving global consensus, this study contributes ongoing discourse on advocating equitable robust system balancing diverse offering standardized measures.

Language: Английский

Evolving patterns of extreme publishing behavior across science DOI
John P. A. Ioannidis,

Thomas A. Collins,

Jeroen Baas

et al.

Scientometrics, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 129(9), P. 5783 - 5796

Published: July 26, 2024

Language: Английский

Citations

15
Updated science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators including retraction data DOI Creative Commons
John P. A. Ioannidis, Angelo Maria Pezzullo,

Antonio Cristiano

et al.

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Sept. 17, 2024

ABSTRACT Citation metrics are widely used in research appraisal, but they provide incomplete views of scientists’ impact and track record. Other indicators practices should be linked to citation data. We have updated a Scopus-based database highly-cited scientists (top-2% each scientific subfield according composite indicator) incorporate retraction Using data from the Retraction Watch (RWDB), records were Scopus Of 55,237 items RWDB as August 15, 2024, we excluded non-retractions, retractions clearly not due any author error, where paper had been republished, linkable records. Eventually 39,468 eligible Scopus. Among 217,097 top-cited career-long 223,152 single recent year (2023) impact, 7,083 (3.3%) 8,747 (4.0%), respectively, at least one retraction. Scientists with retracted publications younger publication age, higher self-citation rates, larger volume than those without publications. Retractions more common life sciences rare or nonexistent several other disciplines. In developing countries, very high proportions (highest Senegal (66.7%), Ecuador (28.6%) Pakistan (27.8%) lists). Variability rates across fields countries suggests differences practices, scrutiny, ease Addition enhances granularity profiles, aiding responsible evaluation. However, caution is needed when interpreting retractions, do always signify misconduct; further analysis on case-by-case basis essential. The hopefully resource for meta-research deeper insights into practices.

Language: Английский

Citations

10
Current status and trend of global research on the pharmacological effects of emodin family: bibliometric study and visual analysis DOI
Miao Luo,

Luorui Shang,

Jinbo Xie

et al.

Naunyn-Schmiedeberg s Archives of Pharmacology, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Jan. 10, 2025

Language: Английский

Citations

1
Linking citation and retraction data reveals the demographics of scientific retractions among highly cited authors DOI Creative Commons
John P. A. Ioannidis, Angelo Maria Pezzullo, Antonio Cristiano

et al.

PLoS Biology, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: 23(1), P. e3002999 - e3002999

Published: Jan. 30, 2025

Retractions are becoming increasingly common but still account for a small minority of published papers. It would be useful to generate databases where the presence retractions can linked impact metrics each scientist. We have thus incorporated retraction data in an updated Scopus-based database highly cited scientists (top 2% scientific subfield according composite citation indicator). Using from Retraction Watch (RWDB), records were Scopus data. Of 55,237 items RWDB as August 15, 2024, we excluded non-retractions, clearly not due any author error, paper had been republished, and linkable records. Eventually, 39,468 eligible Scopus. Among 217,097 top-cited career-long 223,152 single recent year (2023) impact, 7,083 (3.3%) 8,747 (4.0%), respectively, at least 1 retraction. Scientists with retracted publications younger publication age, higher self-citation rates, larger volume than those without publications. more life sciences rare or nonexistent several other disciplines. In developing countries, very high proportions (highest Senegal (66.7%), Ecuador (28.6%), Pakistan (27.8%) lists). Variability rates across fields countries suggests differences research practices, scrutiny, ease Addition enhances granularity scientists’ profiles, aiding responsible evaluation. However, caution is needed when interpreting retractions, they do always signify misconduct; further analysis on case-by-case basis essential. The should hopefully provide resource meta-research deeper insights into practices.

Language: Английский

Citations

1
Output-Normalized Score (OnS) for Ranking Researchers Based on Number of Publications, Citations, Coauthors, and Author Position DOI Creative Commons
Antonije Onjia

Publications, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: 13(1), P. 3 - 3

Published: Jan. 4, 2025

This article discusses current methods for ranking researchers and proposes a new metric, the output-normalized score (OnS), which considers number of publications, citations, coauthors, author’s position within each publication. The proposed OnS offers balanced approach to evaluating researcher’s scientific contributions while addressing limitations widely used metrics such as h-index its modifications. It favors publications with fewer coauthors giving significant weight both in publication total citations.

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Sustaining the “frozen footprints” of scholarly communication through open citations DOI Creative Commons
Zehra Taşkın

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Jan. 9, 2025

Abstract This review examines the role of open citations in fostering transparency, reproducibility, and accessibility scholarly communication. Through a critical synthesis diverse sources—articles, proceedings, presentations, datasets, blog posts—it explores motivations behind citing, evolving meanings citations, key milestones citation movement. Particular attention is given to initiatives like OpenCitations Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC), highlighting their contributions advancing scholarship. Key findings indicate that democratize research by providing free access data, improving discoverability, facilitating creation public graphs. Technological advancements, such as advanced data models reference mining tools, have significantly contributed management utilization data. Despite these benefits, challenges ensuring quality standardization, addressing structural inequalities networks, achieving universal publisher adoption persist. The study concludes with recommendations future efforts, emphasizing policy advocacy, technological innovation, global collaboration, educational promote widespread effective use citations. These strategies aim make “frozen footprints” communication accessible all, more equitable transparent scientific landscape.

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Why does cardiology have many extreme publishing authors? DOI Creative Commons
John P. A. Ioannidis

Hellenic Journal of Cardiology, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Jan. 1, 2025

Under diverse contributing factors in different scientific micro-environments, the number of authors who publish extreme numbers full articles a single year has increased. Cardiology is subfield that largest share with publishing behavior than any other science (outside physics). Between 2000 and 2022, 137 Cardiovascular System (CVS, Science-Metrix classification) have published over 60 at least one calendar are also highly-cited. The majority (70/137) from Europe. All 7 countries highest prevalence CVS per million population European countries. Issues massive authorship papers by administrative leaders discussed, including arguments favor sustaining this practice - refutation these arguments. Other major contributors to phenomenon publications clinical trials epidemiological studies highly-cited guidelines. Micro-environments instrumental creating both developed less Listing contributions does not solve problem since gamed; metrics probe gaming nevertheless available. Eventually, carries credit accountability. Number metric can be heavily gamed. Emphasis should given what makes impact on human lives.

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Provenance and funding of extremely cited biomedical papers published in 2003-2004, 2013-2014 and 2023-2024 DOI Creative Commons
John P. A. Ioannidis

medRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: March 5, 2025

ABSTRACT It is important to monitor changes in biomedical literature and its funding. China has surpassed the USA publications and, some analyses, also impact indicators. The present analysis evaluates 100 top-cited papers (based on Scopus) published each of three time periods (2003-4, 2013-4, 2023-4). Corresponding authors from decreased overtime (59/100 2003-4, 58/100 45/100 had corresponding 0,1, 4 top cited periods, respectively. There was a marked increase consensus items (10/100 2003-4 versus 24/100 2023-4) reference statistics (1/100 10/100 11/100 Reviews remained common among papers, but almost always they were non-systematic. NIH funding listed 45/100, 50/100, 23/100 All other countries combined US public 2023-4. Funding by alone sharply last decade (32/100, 28/100, 2/100 respectively). More commonly non-profit organizations, societies, institutions complemented decline. first 7/45 author(s) 14/45 USA-based 2023-4 as leaders active grants RePORTER February 2025. Citation gaming became more obvious Overall, remains world leader research retains substantial presence papers. However, influence shrunk overall, funded exclusively have disappeared. Strengthening essential secure serves good.

Language: Английский

Citations

0
The Chinese Early Warning Journal List: Strengths, weaknesses and solutions in the light of China's global scientific rise DOI
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Serhii Nazarovets, Timothy Daly

et al.

The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 50(4), P. 102898 - 102898

Published: May 23, 2024

Language: Английский

Citations

3
The changing roles of scientific journals DOI Creative Commons
Arturo Casadevall,

Lorraine F. Clark,

Ferric C. Fang

et al.

mBio, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Oct. 4, 2024

ABSTRACT After centuries of relative stability, the scientific publishing world has undergone tremendous disruption and change during first decades 21st century. The causes for can be traced to information revolution, which brought such benefits as rapid publication, greater connectivity, ready access large databases, along with less desirable practices including image manipulation, plagiarism, other ethical transgressions. revolution driven proliferation journals, expansion for-profit academic publishing, empowerment open-access movement, each exerted new financial pressures on traditional models. As journals became focal point concerns in science, they have adapted by increasing scope their duties, now include archiving data, enforcement good practices, establishment standards rigor, training next generation reviewers editors. Here, we consider seismic changes occurring place them into context a rapidly changing landscape norms.

Language: Английский

Citations

3