Evaluation of the productivity of hospital-based researchers: comparative study between the h-index and the h(fa)-index

Scientometrics - 2021
Paul Sebo1, Sylvain de Lucia2
1Primary Care Unit, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
2Department of Community Health and Medicine, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland

Tóm tắt

The h-index is often used to evaluate researchers and to measure their respective contributions to the scientific community. However, it does not take into account the relative contribution of each author to the articles. We aimed to assess the added value of the h(fa)-index, an index introducing a weighting factor for the first author. This cross-sectional study was conducted in March 2020 in Switzerland. We selected all hospital-based senior physicians practicing internal medicine or family medicine in the six university hospitals. Using Web of Science, we retrieved the h-index and computed the h(fa)-index of all physicians with a non-zero h-index. We used Spearman coefficients to examine the correlation between the two indices and Cohen’s kappa to determine the inter-rater agreement. 244 physicians were included in the study (men: 63%). They had a median h-index of 3 (IQR 11) and a median h(fa) index of 4.5 (IQR 14). The correlation between the two indices was very high (rho 0.98, p-value < 0.001). However, the inter-rater agreement was only moderate (Kappa 0.59 [95% CI 0.56–0.64]). The h(fa)-index was able to correct the categorization of the researchers in about 1/3 of the cases (agreement 63.4%). Although it is very challenging to evaluate researchers with a unique indicator, these data suggest that the h(fa)-index could be a better evaluation tool of researchers’ productivity.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Akers, K. G., Sarkozy, A., Wu, W., & Slyman, A. (2016). ORCID Author identifiers: A primer for librarians. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 35, 135–144.

Baldock, C. (2008). The h-index and medical physics. Australasian Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine, 31, xi–xii.

Bavdekar, S. B., & Tullu, M. S. (2016). Research publications for academic career advancement: An idea whose time has come. But is this the right way? Jounal of Postgraduate Medicine, 62, 1–3.

Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2011). The h index as a research performance indicator. European Science Editing, 37(3), 77–80.

Butson, M. J., & Yu, P. K. N. (2010). The first author h-index (h(fa)-index): levelling the field for small and large institute medical and science scholars. Australasian Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine, 33, 299–300.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Duro, D. C., Franklin, S. E., & Dubé, M. G. (2012). A comparison of pixel-based and object-based image analysis with selected machine learning algorithms for the classification of agricultural landscapes using SPOT-5 HRG imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment, 118, 259–272.

Gasparyan, A. Y., Akazhanov, N. A., Voronov, A. A., & Kitas, G. D. (2014). Systematic and open identification of researchers and authors: focus on open researcher and contributor ID. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 29, 1453–1456.

Gasparyan, A. Y., Yessirkepov, M., Gerasimov, A. N., Kostyukova, E. I., & Kitas, G. D. (2016). Scientific author names: Errors, corrections, and identity profiles. Biochemia Medica, 26, 169–173.

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 16569–16572.

Lafrenière, D., Menuz, V., Hurlimann, T., & Godard, B. (2013). Knowledge dissemination interventions: A literature review. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013498242

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.

Lerchenmueller, M. J., & Sorenson, O. (2016). Author disambiguation in PubMed: Evidence on the Precision and recall of author-ity among NIH-funded scientists. PLoS ONE, 11(7), e0158731.

Mabe, M. A. (2010). Scholarly communication: A long view. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16, 132–144.

McClelland, S., Mitin, T., Jagsi, R., Thomas, C. R., & Jaboin, J. J. (2018). Importance of first and second authorship in assessing citation-based scholarly activity of US radiation oncology residents and subsequent choice of academic versus private practice career. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 15, 1322–1325.

Negative Binomial Regression | Stata Annotated Output [Internet]. (2019). Available from: https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/stata/output/negative-binomial-regression/.

Negative Binomial Regression | Stata Data Analysis Examples [Internet]. (2019). Available from: https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/stata/dae/negative-binomial-regression/.

Pfeiffer, M., Fischer, M. R., & Bauer, D. (2016). Publication activities of German junior researchers in academic medicine: Which factors impact impact factors? BMC Medical Education, 16, 190.

Post, R. E., Weese, T. J., Mainous, A. G., & Weiss, B. D. (2012). Publication productivity by family medicine faculty: 1999 to 2009. Family Medicine, 44, 312–317.

Prpić, K. (1996). Characteristics and determinants of eminent scientists’ productivity. Scientometrics, 36, 185–206.

Schubert, A., & Schubert, G. (2019). All Along the H-Index-Related Literature: A Guided Tour. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer Handb Sci Technol Indic (pp. 301–334). Springer Verlag.

Sebo, P., de Lucia, S., & Vernaz, N. (2020). Scientific publications in internal medicine and family medicine: A comparative cross-sectional study in Swiss university hospitals. Family Practice. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmaa124.

Sebo, P., de Lucia, S., & Vernaz, N. (2021). Gender gap in medical research: a bibliometric study in Swiss university hospitals. Scientometrics, 126, 741–755.

Tian, Y., Zhang, H., Pang, Y., & Lin, J. (2018). Classification for single-trial N170 during responding to facial picture with emotion. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 12, 68.

Vale, R. D. (2015). Accelerating scientific publication in biology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 13439–13446.

Vavryčuk, V. (2018). Fair ranking of researchers and research teams. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195509.

Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2012). The inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63, 406–415.

Zhu, H., & Lakkis, H. (2014). Sample size calculation for comparing two negative binomial rates. Statistics in Medicine, 33, 376–387.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Scientometrics

Thông tin tác giả