Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:11:37 BST CiteULike: Tag bibliometrics http://www.citeulike.org/tag/bibliometrics CiteULike.org en-gb Copyright © 2004-2008 citeulike.org http://www.citeulike.org/user/vmircevski/article/494308 <i>(1998), pp. 89-98.</i> CiteSeer: an automatic citation indexing system Lee Giles Kurt Bollacker Steve Lawrence doi:10.1145/276675.276685 (1998), pp. 89-98. 2006-02-06T17:46:36-00:00 1998 89 98 ACM Press bibliometrics citation_graph_analysis citation_indexing_system http://www.citeulike.org/user/stefanherzog/article/300430 <i>Nature, Vol. 436, No. 7053. (2005), pp. 889-890.</i> Ratings games doi:10.1038/436889b Nature, Vol. 436, No. 7053. (2005), pp. 889-890. 2005-08-22T15:47:09-00:00 2005 Nature 436 7053 889 890 bibliometrics impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/ssn/article/2394624 <i>Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 2, No. 1. (January 2008), pp. 1-52.</i><br /><br />This paper reviews developments in informetrics between 2000 and 2006. At the beginning of the 21st century we witness considerable growth in webometrics, mapping and visualization and open access. A new topic is comparison between citation databases, as a result of the introduction of two new citation databases Scopus and Google Scholar. There is renewed interest in indicators as a result of the introduction of the h-index. Traditional topics like citation analysis and informetric theory also continue to develop. The impact factor debate, especially outside the informetric literature continues to thrive. Ranked lists (of journal, highly cited papers or of educational institutions) are of great public interest. Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century--A review Judit Bar-Ilan doi:10.1016/j.joi.2007.11.001 Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 2, No. 1. (January 2008), pp. 1-52. 2008-02-18T14:41:13-00:00 2008 Journal of Informetrics 2 1 1 52 bibliometrics survey http://www.citeulike.org/user/ssn/article/584493 <i>Science, Vol. 178, No. 60. (3 November 1972), pp. 471-479.</i> Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. E Garfield Science, Vol. 178, No. 60. (3 November 1972), pp. 471-479. 2006-04-12T17:59:32-00:00 1972 Science 0036-8075 178 60 471 479 2get bibliometrics information-retrieval information-science link-analysis prodei http://www.citeulike.org/user/ssn/article/677840 <i>(2004), pp. 448-449.</i><br /><br />Web search is probably the single most important application on the Internet. The most famous search techniques are perhaps the PageRank and HITS algorithms. These algorithms are motivated by the observation that a hyperlink from a page to another is an implicit conveyance of authority to the target page. They exploit this social phenomenon to identify quality pages, e.g., "authority" pages and "hub" pages. In this paper we argue that these algorithms miss an important dimension of the Web, the temporal dimension. The Web is not a static environment. It changes constantly. Quality pages in the past may not be quality pages now or in the future. These techniques favor older pages because these pages have many in-links accumulated over time. New pages, which may be of high quality, have few or no in-links and are left behind. Bringing new and quality pages to users is important because most users want the latest information. Research publication search has exactly the same problem. This paper studies the temporal dimension of search in the context of research publication search. We propose a number of methods deal with the problem. Our experimental results show that these methods are highly effective. On the temporal dimension of search Philip Yu Xin Li Bing Liu doi:10.1145/1013367.1013519 (2004), pp. 448-449. 2006-05-31T10:40:01-00:00 2004 448 449 ACM Press bibliometrics dynamics information-retrieval temporal web http://www.citeulike.org/user/simeon_warner/article/2741685 <i>(24 May 2006)</i><br /><br />Although recording of usage data is common in scholarly information services, its exploitation for the creation of value-added services remains limited due to concerns regarding, among others, user privacy, data validity, and the lack of accepted standards for the representation, sharing and aggregation of usage data. This paper presents a technical, standards-based architecture for sharing usage information, which we have designed and implemented. In this architecture, OpenURL-compliant linking servers aggregate usage information of a specific user community as it navigates the distributed information environment that it has access to. This usage information is made OAI-PMH harvestable so that usage information exposed by many linking servers can be aggregated to facilitate the creation of value-added services with a reach beyond that of a single community or a single information service. This paper also discusses issues that were encountered when implementing the proposed approach, and it presents preliminary results obtained from analyzing a usage data set containing about 3,500,000 requests aggregated by a federation of linking servers at the California State University system over a 20 month period. An Architecture for the Aggregation and Analysis of Scholarly Usage Data Johan Bollen Herbert Van de Sompel (24 May 2006) 2008-05-01T04:00:28-00:00 2006 bibliometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/742070 <i>Inf. Process. Manage., Vol. 41, No. 6. (December 2005), pp. 1462-1480.</i> Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community Xiaoming Liu Johan Bollen Michael Nelson Herbert Van de Sompel doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2005.03.012 Inf. Process. Manage., Vol. 41, No. 6. (December 2005), pp. 1462-1480. 2006-07-06T13:43:19-00:00 2005 Inf. Process. Manage. 0306-4573 41 6 1462 1480 Pergamon Press, Inc. bibliometrics peer-review http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/509458 <i>Nature, Vol. 439, No. 7078. (15 February 2006), pp. 770-771.</i> Prestige is factored into journal ratings Philip Ball doi:10.1038/439770a Nature, Vol. 439, No. 7078. (15 February 2006), pp. 770-771. 2006-02-18T12:38:32-00:00 2006 Nature 0028-0836 439 7078 770 771 Nature Publishing Group bibliometrics citation impact impact_factor http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/670393 <i>(24 May 2006)</i><br /><br />The peer-review process is the most widely accepted certification mechanism for legitimizing the written results of researchers within the scientific community. An essential component of this process is the identification of competent referees to review a submitted manuscript. This paper presents an algorithm to automatically determine the most appropriate reviewers for a manuscript by way of a co-authorship network data structure and a relative-rank particle-swarm algorithm. This approach is novel in that it is not limited to a pre-selected set of referees, is computationally efficient, requires no human-intervention, and can automatically identify conflict of interest situations. The algorithm is validated using referee bid data from the 2005 Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. An Algorithm to Determine Peer-Reviewers Marko Rodriguez Johan Bollen (24 May 2006) 2006-05-25T18:28:52-00:00 2006 bibliometrics peer-review http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/380980 <i>ACM Comput. Surv., Vol. 31, No. 4es. (1999)</i> Hubs, authorities, and communities Jon Kleinberg doi:10.1145/345966.345982 ACM Comput. Surv., Vol. 31, No. 4es. (1999) 2005-11-04T17:50:48-00:00 1999 ACM Comput. Surv. 0360-0300 31 4es ACM Press analysis bibliometrics network http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/936883 <i>(26 Oct 2006)</i><br /><br />There exist ample demonstrations that indicators of scholarly impact analogous to the citation-based ISI Impact Factor can be derived from usage data. However, contrary to the ISI IF which is based on citation data generated by the global community of scholarly authors, so far usage can only be practically recorded at a local level leading to community-specific assessments of scholarly impact that are difficult to generalize to the global scholarly community. We define a journal Usage Impact Factor which mimics the definition of the Thomson Scientific's ISI Impact Factor. Usage Impact Factor rankings are calculated on the basis of a large-scale usage data set recorded for the California State University system from 2003 to 2005. The resulting journal rankings are then compared to Thomson Scientific's ISI Impact Factor which is used as a baseline indicator of general impact. Our results indicate that impact as derived from California State University usage reflects the particular scientific and demographic characteristics of its communities. Usage Impact Factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics Johan Bollen Herbert Van de Sompel (26 Oct 2006) 2006-11-08T21:49:00-00:00 2006 bibliometrics impact_factor network-analysis usage http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/1338609 <i>(26 Mar 2007)</i><br /><br />Scientometric predictors of research performance need to be validated by showing that they have a high correlation with the external criterion they are trying to predict. The UK Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), together with the growing movement toward making the full-texts of research articles freely available on the web -- offer a unique opportunity to test and validate a wealth of old and new scientometric predictors, through multiple regression analysis: Publications, journal impact factors, citations, co-citations, citation chronometrics (age, growth, latency to peak, decay rate), hub/authority scores, h-index, prior funding, student counts, co-authorship scores, endogamy/exogamy, textual proximity, download/co-downloads and their chronometrics, etc. can all be tested and validated jointly, discipline by discipline, against their RAE panel rankings in the forthcoming parallel panel-based and metric RAE in 2008. The weights of each predictor can be calibrated to maximize the joint correlation with the rankings. Open Access Scientometrics will provide powerful new means of navigating, evaluating, predicting and analyzing the growing Open Access database, as well as powerful incentives for making it grow faster. ~ Open Access Scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise Stevan Harnad (26 Mar 2007) 2007-05-28T12:37:44-00:00 2007 bibliometrics network-analysis open_access research-assessment-exercise http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/1115 <i>Journal of the ACM, Vol. 46, No. 5. (1999), pp. 604-632.</i><br /><br />. The network structure of a hyperlinked environment can be a rich source of information about the content of the environment, provided we have effective means for understanding it. We develop a set of algorithmic tools for extracting information from the link structures of such environments, and report on experiments that demonstrate their effectiveness in a variety of contexts on the World Wide Web. The central issue we address within our framework is the distillation of broad search topics,... Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment Jon Kleinberg Journal of the ACM, Vol. 46, No. 5. (1999), pp. 604-632. 2004-11-29T10:40:48-00:00 1999 Journal of the ACM 46 5 604 632 authorities bibliometrics hubs network-analysis http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/912727 <i>(1 Sep 2004)</i><br /><br />In many growing networks, the age of the nodes plays an important role in deciding the attachment probability of the incoming nodes. For example, in a citation network, very old papers are seldom cited while recent papers are usually cited with high frequency. We study actual citation networks to find out the distribution $T(t)$ of $t$, the time interval between the published and the cited paper. For different sets of data we find a universal behaviour: $T(t) ∼ t^-0.9$ for $t ≤ t_c$ and $T(t) ∼ t^-2$ for $t>t_c$ where $t_c ∼ O(10)$. Aging in Citation Networks Kamalika Hajra Parongama Sen (1 Sep 2004) 2006-10-25T21:27:11-00:00 2004 analysis bibliometrics citation http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/477678 <i>(31 December 2005)</i><br /><br />This book deals with the evaluation of scholarly research performance, and focuses on the contribution of scholarly work to the advancement of scholarly knowledge. Its principal question is: how can citation analysis be used properly as a tool in the assessment of such a contribution? Citation analysis involves the construction and application of a series of indicators of the ‘impact’, ‘influence’ or ‘quality’ of scholarly work, derived from references cited in footnotes or bibliographies of scholarly research publications. It describes primarily the use of data extracted from the Science Citation Index and the Web of Science, published by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)/Thomson Scientific. But many aspects to which this book dedicates attention relate to citation analysis in general, It provides a wide range of important facts, and corrects a number of common misunderstandings about citation analysis. It introduces basic notions and distinctions, and deals both with theoretical and technical aspects, and with its applicability in various policy contexts, at the level of individual scholars, research groups, departments, institutions, national scholarly systems, disciplines or subfields, and scholarly journals. Although the major part of the analysis relates to the basic science – a domain in which citation analysis is used most frequently – this book also addresses its uses and limits in the applied and technical sciences, social sciences and humanities. It reveals the enormous potential of quantitative, bibliometric analyses of the scholarly literature for a deeper understanding of scholarly activity and performance, and highlights their policy relevance. But this book is also critical, underlines the limits of citation analysis in research evaluation, and issues warnings for potential misuse. It proposes criteria for proper use of citation analysis as a research evaluation tool. In order to be used properly as a research evaluation tool, it is essential that all participants have insight into the nature of citation analysis, how its indicators are constructed and calculated, what the various theoretical positions state about what they measure, and what are their potentialities and limitations, particularly in relation to peer review. This book aims at providing such insight. Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation Henk Moed (31 December 2005) 2006-01-23T15:36:47-00:00 2005 Springer bibliometrics citation impact_factor http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/402217 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 56, No. 10. (31 May 2005), pp. 1088-1097.</i><br /><br />Statistical relationships between downloads from ScienceDirect of documents in Elsevier's electronic journal <I >Tetrahedron Letters</I > and citations to these documents recorded in journals processed by the Institute for Scientific Information/Thomson Scientific for the <I >Science Citation Index</I > (<I >SCI</I >) are examined. A synchronous approach revealed that downloads and citations show different patterns of obsolescence of the used materials. The former can be adequately described by a model consisting of the sum of two negative exponential functions, representing an ephemeral and a residual factor, whereas the decline phase of the latter conforms to a simple exponential function with a decay constant statistically similar to that of the downloads residual factor. A diachronous approach showed that, as a cohort of documents grows older, its download distribution becomes more and more skewed, and more statistically similar to its citation distribution. A method is proposed to estimate the effect of citations upon downloads using obsolescence patterns. It was found that during the first 3 months after an article is cited, its number of downloads increased 25% compared to what one would expect this number to be if the article had not been cited. Moreover, more downloads of citing documents led to more downloads of the cited article through the citation. An analysis of 1,190 papers in the journal during a time interval of 2 years after publication date revealed that there is about one citation for every 100 downloads. A Spearman rank correlation coefficient of 0.22 was found between the number of times an article was downloaded and its citation rate recorded in the <I >SCI</I >. When initial downloads - defined as downloads made during the first 3 months after publication - were discarded, the correlation raised to 0.35. However, both outcomes measure the joint effect of downloads upon citation and that of citation upon downloads. Correlating initial downloads to later citation counts, the correlation coefficient drops to 0.11. Findings suggest that initial downloads and citations relate to distinct phases in the process of collecting and processing relevant scientific information that eventually leads to the publication of a journal article. Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal Henk Moed doi:10.1002/asi.20200 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 56, No. 10. (31 May 2005), pp. 1088-1097. 2005-11-20T20:17:55-00:00 2005 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 1532-2890 56 10 1088 1097 bibliometrics citation impact usage http://www.citeulike.org/user/scholze/article/516722 <i>(9 Jan 2006)</i><br /><br />[Web, digital library, computers and society, citation, impact factor, page rank, popular vs. prestige] The status of an actor in a social context is commonly defined in terms of two factors: the total number of endorsements the actor receives from other actors and the prestige of the endorsing actors. These two factors indicate the distinction between popularity and expert appreciation of the actor, respectively. We refer to the former as popularity and to the latter as prestige. These notions of popularity and prestige also apply to the domain of scholarly assessment. The ISI Impact Factor (ISI IF) is defined as the mean number of citations a journal receives over a 2 year period. By merely counting the amount of citations and disregarding the prestige of the citing journals, the ISI IF is a metric of popularity, not of prestige. We demonstrate how a weighted version of the popular PageRank algorithm can be used to obtain a metric that reflects prestige. We contrast the rankings of journals according to their ISI IF and their weighted PageRank, and we provide an analysis that reveals both significant overlaps and differences. Furthermore, we introduce the Y-factor which is a simple combination of both the ISI IF and the weighted PageRank, and find that the resulting journal rankings correspond well to a general understanding of journal status. Journal Status Johan Bollen Marko Rodriguez Herbert Van de Sompel (9 Jan 2006) 2006-02-23T08:51:20-00:00 2006 bibliometrics citation impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/pdlug/article/1189220 <i>(13 Dec 2006)</i><br /><br />To account for strong aging characteristics of citation networks, we modify Google's PageRank algorithm by initially distributing random surfers exponentially with age, in favor of more recent publications. The output of this algorithm, which we call CiteRank, is interpreted as approximate traffic to individual publications in a simple model of how researchers find new information. We develop an analytical understanding of traffic flow in terms of an RPA-like model and optimize parameters of our algorithm to achieve the best performance. The results are compared for two rather different citation networks: all American Physical Society publications and the set of high-energy physics theory (hep-th) preprints. Despite major differences between these two networks, we find that their optimal parameters for the CiteRank algorithm are remarkably similar. Ranking Scientific Publications Using a Simple Model of Network Traffic Dylan Walker Huafeng Xie Koon-Kiu Yan Sergei Maslov (13 Dec 2006) 2007-03-27T14:13:45-00:00 2006 bibliometrics metric publications ranking science http://www.citeulike.org/user/pdlug/article/447228 <i>(20 Dec 2005)</i><br /><br />Time evolution of the classification scheme generated by the EqRank algorithm is studied with hep-th citation graph as an example. Intuitive expectations about evolution of an adequate classification scheme for a growing set of objects are formulated. Evolution compliant with these expectations is called natural. It is demonstrated that EqRank yields a naturally evolving classification scheme. We conclude that EqRank can be used as a means to detect new scientific themes, and to track their development. EqRank: Theme Evolution in Citation Graphs GB Pivovarov SE Trunov (20 Dec 2005) 2005-12-22T15:49:38-00:00 2005 academic bibliometrics citation citations collaboration network networks science social social-network socialnetworks social-networks http://www.citeulike.org/user/pdlug/article/276731 <i>(3 Aug 2005)</i><br /><br />I propose the index $h$, defined as the number of papers with citation number higher or equal to $h$, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher. An index to quantify an individual's scientific output JE Hirsch (3 Aug 2005) 2005-08-08T10:17:12-00:00 2005 bibliometrics citation citations informationretrieval information-retrieval informatioretrieval ir library linking publishing ranking http://www.citeulike.org/user/norris/article/1310275 <i>International Applied Mechanics, Vol. 42, No. 11. (November 2006), pp. 1203-1222.</i> On the evolution of the scientific information environment Guz doi:10.1007/s10778-006-0192-y International Applied Mechanics, Vol. 42, No. 11. (November 2006), pp. 1203-1222. 2007-05-20T06:01:15-00:00 2006 International Applied Mechanics 1063-7095 42 11 1203 1222 Springer bibliometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/mshafiei/article/874146 <i>(2006), pp. 65-74.</i> Bibliometric impact measures leveraging topic analysis Gideon Mann David Mimno Andrew Mccallum doi:10.1145/1141753.1141765 (2006), pp. 65-74. 2006-09-26T18:30:44-00:00 2006 65 74 ACM Press bibliometrics clustering digital_libraries impact measures topic http://www.citeulike.org/user/msampson/article/997113 <i>BMC Public Health, Vol. 6 (15 December 2006), 301.</i> A bibliometric analysis in the fields of preventive medicine, occupational and environmental medicine,epidemiology, and public health Elpidoforos Soteriades Matthew Falagas doi:10.1186/1471-2458-6-301 BMC Public Health, Vol. 6 (15 December 2006), 301. 2006-12-15T15:40:09-00:00 2006 BMC Public Health 1471-2458 6 301 bibliometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2015876 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 58, No. 14. (2007), pp. 2167-2179.</i><br /><br />This study proposes a new methodology that allows for the generation of scientograms of major scientific domains, constructed on the basis of cocitation of Institute of Scientific Information categories, and pruned using PathfinderNetwork, with a layout determined by algorithms of the spring-embedder type (Kamada-Kawai), then corroborated structurally by factor analysis. We present the complete scientogram of the world for the Year 2002. It integrates the natural sciences, the social sciences, and arts and humanities. Its basic structure and the essential relationships therein are revealed, allowing us to simultaneously analyze the macrostructure, microstructure, and marrow of worldwide scientific output. Visualizing the marrow of science Scimago Benjamín Vargas-Quesada Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez Elena Corera-Álvarez Francisco Munoz-Fernández Victor Herrero-Solana doi:10.1002/asi.20683 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 58, No. 14. (2007), pp. 2167-2179. 2007-11-29T15:18:04-00:00 2007 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 14 2167 2179 bibliometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/1653871 <i>BMC Med, Vol. 1 (24 November 2003)</i><br /><br />BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews summarize all pertinent evidence on a defined health question. They help clinical scientists to direct their research and clinicians to keep updated. Our objective was to determine the extent to which systematic reviews are clustered in a large collection of clinical journals and whether review type (narrative or systematic) affects citation counts. METHODS: We used hand searches of 170 clinical journals in the fields of general internal medicine, primary medical care, nursing, and mental health to identify review articles (year 2000). We defined 'review' as any full text article that was bannered as a review, overview, or meta-analysis in the title or in a section heading, or that indicated in the text that the intention of the authors was to review or summarize the literature on a particular topic. We obtained citation counts for review articles in the five journals that published the most systematic reviews. RESULTS: 11% of the journals concentrated 80% of all systematic reviews. Impact factors were weakly correlated with the publication of systematic reviews (R2 = 0.075, P = 0.0035). There were more citations for systematic reviews (median 26.5, IQR 12 - 56.5) than for narrative reviews (8, 20, P <.0001 for the difference). Systematic reviews had twice as many citations as narrative reviews published in the same journal (95% confidence interval 1.5 - 2.7). CONCLUSIONS: A few clinical journals published most systematic reviews. Authors cited systematic reviews more often than narrative reviews, an indirect endorsement of the 'hierarchy of evidence'. Systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. VM Montori NL Wilczynski D Morgan RB Haynes doi:10.1186/1741-7015-1-2 BMC Med, Vol. 1 (24 November 2003) 2007-09-14T01:56:55-00:00 2003 BMC Med 1741-7015 1 bibliometrics publishing systematic_reviews http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2942065 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 30, No. 1. (26 May 1994), pp. 175-186.</i><br /><br />Abstract  The assumption underlying citation analysis is that the citing authors select their references in a rational manner. The present study, based on a very homogeneous collection of clinical trials from a meta-analysis, provides a partial verification of this idea: citing authors prefer large studies to smaller ones, they also seem to prefer studies representing the minority view of the research issue, perhaps in order to make their presentation more balanced. On the other hand, in this instance the inclusion of a placebo in the study design does not affect citation frequency. Furthermore, the conjecture that heuristic value is a main determinant of citability is not settled. On the heuristic value of scientific publications and their design; A citation analysis of some clinical trials Bluma Peritz doi:10.1007/BF02017221 Scientometrics, Vol. 30, No. 1. (26 May 1994), pp. 175-186. 2008-06-29T20:01:56-00:00 1994 Scientometrics 30 1 175 186 bibliometrics citation_analysis scientometrics systematic_reviews http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2942052 <i>Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, Vol. 76, No. 1. (January 1988), pp. 14-21.</i><br /><br />Librarians have often questioned the usefulness of the proceedings of biomedical meetings. Because articles in proceedings are similar to journal articles, the usefulness of the two were compared. Thirty-two monographic cardiovascular proceedings were compared to thirty-five cardiovascular journals, all published in 1978. Citations to the articles in these samples were counted for the years 1978, 1979, and 1980, and an impact factor was calculated for each proceedings and journal. The mean impact factor of the journals (3.86) was significantly higher than the mean impact factor of the proceedings (0.98, p less than .001). A short delay in publication of a proceedings was not associated with a higher impact factor. There were no differences in impact factors between U.S. and non-U.S. meeting sites. Proceedings of "hot" topics were not associated with higher impact factors, and multiple-index coverage of proceedings was only weakly associated (tau = 0.27) with higher impact factors. While camera-ready proceedings had a significantly higher mean impact factor (2.37) than typeset proceedings (0.66, p less than .02), selection based on printing method is not recommended. It is concluded that most libraries can safely forego the purchase of monographic proceedings. If a library needs monographic proceedings, it should purchase only those recommended by subject specialists. The usefulness of monographic proceedings. ME Funk CA Reid Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, Vol. 76, No. 1. (January 1988), pp. 14-21. 2008-06-29T19:44:05-00:00 1988 Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 0025-7338 76 1 14 21 bibliometrics citation_analysis collection_management lis publishing scientometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2970164 <i>PLoS ONE, Vol. 3, No. 7. (2 July 2008), e2512.</i><br /><br />Background: The quality of biomedical reporting is guided by statements of several organizations. Although not all journals adhere to these guidelines, those that do demonstrate “editorial leadership” in their author community. To investigate a possible relationship between editorial leadership and journal quality, research journals from two European countries, one Anglophone and one non-Anglophone, were studied and compared. Quality was measured on a panel of bibliometric parameters while editorial leadership was evaluated from journals' instructions to authors. Methodology/Principal Findings: The study considered all 76 Italian journals indexed in Medline and 76 randomly chosen UK journals; only journals both edited and published in these countries were studied. Compared to UK journals, Italian journals published fewer papers (median, 60 vs. 93; p = 0.006), less often had online archives (43 vs. 74; p<0.001) and had lower median values of impact factor (1.2 vs. 2.7, p<0.001) and SCImago journal rank (0.09 vs. 0.25, p<0.001). Regarding editorial leadership, Italian journals less frequently required manuscripts to specify competing interests (p<0.001), authors' contributions (p = 0.005), funding (p<0.001), informed consent (p<0.001), ethics committee review (p<0.001). No Italian journal adhered to COPE or the CONSORT and QUOROM statements nor required clinical trial registration, while these characteristics were observed in 15%–43% of UK journals (p<0.001). At multiple regression, editorial leadership predicted 37.1%–49.9% of the variance in journal quality defined by citation statistics (p<0.0001); confounding variables inherent to a cross-cultural comparison had a relatively small contribution, explaining an additional 6.2%–13.8% of the variance. Conclusions/Significance: Journals from Italy scored worse for quality and editorial leadership than did their UK counterparts. Editorial leadership predicted quality for the entire set of journals. Greater appreciation of international initiatives to improve biomedical reporting may help low-quality journals achieve higher status. Relationship between Quality and Editorial Leadership of Biomedical Research Journals: A Comparative Study of Italian and UK Journals Valerie Matarese doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002512 PLoS ONE, Vol. 3, No. 7. (2 July 2008), e2512. 2008-07-07T14:05:27-00:00 2008 PLoS ONE 3 7 e2512 Public Library of Science bibliometrics impactfactor publishing quality http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2970147 <i>Journal of Zhejiang University - Science B, Vol. 9, No. 7. (1 July 2008), pp. 582-590.</i><br /><br />Abstract  We discuss what document types account for the calculation of the journal impact factor (JIF) as published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Based on a brief review of articles discussing how to predict JIFs and taking data differences between the Web of Science (WoS) and the JCR into account, we make our own predictions. Using data by cited-reference searching for Thomson Scientific’s WoS, we predict 2007 impact factors (IFs) for several journals, such as Nature, Science, Learned Publishing and some Library and Information Sciences journals. Based on our colleagues’ experiences we expect our predictions to be lower bounds for the official journal impact factors. We explain why it is useful to derive one’s own journal impact factor. On indexing in the Web of Science and predicting journal impact factor Xiu-Fang Wu Qiang Fu Ronald Rousseau doi:10.1631/jzus.B0840001 Journal of Zhejiang University - Science B, Vol. 9, No. 7. (1 July 2008), pp. 582-590. 2008-07-07T13:56:01-00:00 2008 Journal of Zhejiang University - Science B 9 7 582 590 bibliometrics impactfactor http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2436650 <i>Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, Vol. 5 (26 February 2008), 3.</i> Factors related to the frequency of citation of epidemiologic publications Kristian Filion IB Pless doi:10.1186/1742-5573-5-3 Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, Vol. 5 (26 February 2008), 3. 2008-02-27T13:56:49-00:00 2008 Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations 1742-5573 5 3 bibliometrics citation_analysis epidemiology http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2893188 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1366-1382.</i><br /><br />This paper examines the probability structure of the 2005 Science Citation Index (SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) Journal Citation Reports (JCR) by analyzing the Impact Factor distributions of their journals. The distribution of the SCI journals corresponded with a distribution generally modeled by the negative binomial distribution, whereas the SSCI distribution fit the Poisson distribution modeling random, rare events. Both Impact Factor distributions were positively skewed - the SCI much more so than the SSCI - indicating excess variance. One of the causes of this excess variance was that the journals highest in the Impact Factor in both JCRs tended to class in subject categories well funded by the National Institutes of Health. The main reason for the SCI Impact Factor distribution being more skewed than the SSCI one was that review journals defining disciplinary paradigms play a much more important role in the sciences than in the social sciences. Distributional differences of the impact factor in the sciences versus the social sciences: An analysis of the probabilistic structure of the 2005 journal citation reports Stephen Bensman doi:10.1002/asi.20810 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1366-1382. 2008-06-13T20:34:56-00:00 2008 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 9 1366 1382 bibliometrics impactfactor http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2893185 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1393-1408.</i><br /><br />This study assessed the intermix of local citation analysis and survey of journal use and reading patterns for evaluating an academic library's research collection. Journal articles and their cited references from faculties at the University of New South Wales were downloaded from the Web of Science (WoS) and journal impact factors from the Journal Citation Reports. The survey of the University of New South Wales (UNSW) academic staff asked both reader-related and reading-related questions. Both methods showed that academics in medicine published more and had more coauthors per paper than academics in the other faculties; however, when correlated with the number of students and academic staff, science published more and engineering published in higher impact journals. When ldquorecalledrdquo numbers of articles published were compared to ldquoactualrdquo numbers, all faculties over-estimated their productivity by nearly two-fold. The distribution of cited serial references was highly skewed with over half of the titles cited only once. The survey results corresponded with U.S. university surveys with one exception: Engineering academics reported the highest number of article readings and read mostly for research related activities. Citation analysis data showed that the UNSW library provided the majority of journals in which researchers published and cited, mostly in electronic formats. However, the availability of non-journal cited sources was low. The joint methods provided both confirmatory and contradictory results and proved useful in evaluating library research collections. Local citation analysis, publishing and reading patterns: Using multiple methods to evaluate faculty use of an academic library's research collection Concepción Wilson Carol Tenopir doi:10.1002/asi.20812 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1393-1408. 2008-06-13T20:32:22-00:00 2008 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 9 1393 1408 bibliometrics citation_analysis collection_management lis http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2893179 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1433-1440.</i><br /><br />Research evaluation is increasingly popular and important among research funding bodies and science policy makers. Various indicators have been proposed to evaluate the standing of individual scientists, institutions, journals, or countries. A simple and popular one among the indicators is the h-index, the Hirsch index (Hirsch 2005), which is an indicator for lifetime achievement of a scholar. Several other indicators have been proposed to complement or balance the h-index. However, these indicators have no conception of aging. The AR-index (Jin et al. 2007) incorporates aging but divides the received citation counts by the raw age of the publication. Consequently, the decay of a publication is very steep and insensitive to disciplinary differences. In addition, we believe that a publication becomes outdated only when it is no longer cited, not because of its age. Finally, all indicators treat citations as equally material when one might reasonably think that a citation from a heavily cited publication should weigh more than a citation froma non-cited or little-cited publication.We propose a new indicator, the Discounted Cumulated Impact (DCI) index, which devalues old citations in a smooth way. It rewards an author for receiving new citations even if the publication is old. Further, it allows weighting of the citations by the citation weight of the citing publication. DCI can be used to calculate research performance on the basis of the h-core of a scholar or any other publication data set. Finally, it supports comparing research performance to the average performance in the domain and across domains as well. The DCI index: Discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation Kalervo Järvelin Olle Persson doi:10.1002/asi.20847 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1433-1440. 2008-06-13T20:27:36-00:00 2008 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 9 1433 1440 bibliometrics citation_analysis impactfactor http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2893171 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1513-1522.</i><br /><br />J.E. Hirsch (2005) introduced the h-index to quantify an individual's scientific research output by the largest number h of a scientist's papers that received at least h citations. To take into account the highly skewed frequency distribution of citations, L. Egghe (2006a) proposed the g-index as an improvement of the h-index. I have worked out 26 practical cases of physicists from the Institute of Physics at Chemnitz University of Technology, and compare the h and g values in this study. It is demonstrated that the g-index discriminates better between different citation patterns. This also can be achieved by evaluating B.H. Jin's (2006) A-index, which reflects the average number of citations in the h-core, and interpreting it in conjunction with the h-index. h and A can be combined into the R-index to measure the h-core's citation intensity. I also have determined the A and R values for the 26 datasets. For a better comparison, I utilize interpolated indices. The correlations between the various indices as well as with the total number of papers and the highest citation counts are discussed. The largest Pearson correlation coefficient is found between g and R. Although the correlation between g and h is relatively strong, the arrangement of the datasets is significantly different depending on whether they are put into order according to the values of either h or g. An empirical investigation of the <I>g</I>-index for 26 physicists in comparison with the <I>h</I>-index, the <I>A</I>-index, and the <I>R</I>-index Michael Schreiber doi:10.1002/asi.20856 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 9. (2008), pp. 1513-1522. 2008-06-13T20:25:05-00:00 2008 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 9 1513 1522 bibliometrics citation_analysis http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/1924096 <i>Rev Saude Publica, Vol. 40 Spec no. (August 2006), pp. 50-56.</i><br /><br />Whilst their 'death' has often been certified, books remain highly important to most professions and academic disciplines. Analyses of citations received by epidemiologic texts may complement other views on epidemiology. The objective was to assess the number of citations received by some books of epidemiology and public health, as a first step towards studying the influence of epidemiological thought and thinking in academia. For this purpose, Institute for Scientific Information/ Thomson Scientific - Web of Science/ Web of Knowledgedatabase was consulted, in May 2006. The book by Rothman & Greenland appeared to have received the highest number of citations overall (over 8,000) and per year. The books by Kleinbaum et al, and by Breslow & Day received around 5,000 citations. In terms of citations per year the book by Sackett et al ranks 3rd, and the one by Rose, 4th of those included in this preliminary study. Other books which were influential in the classrooms collected comparatively less citations. Results offer a rich picture of the academic influences and trends of epidemiologic methods and reasoning on public health, clinical medicine and the other health, life and social sciences. They may contribute to assess epidemiologists' efforts to demarcate epidemiology and to assert epistemic authority, and to analyze some historical influences of economic, social and political forces on epidemiological research. Book citations: influence of epidemiologic thought in the academic community. M Porta E Fernandez E Puigdomènech Rev Saude Publica, Vol. 40 Spec no. (August 2006), pp. 50-56. 2007-11-15T22:02:45-00:00 2006 Rev Saude Publica 0034-8910 40 Spec no. 50 56 bibliometrics lis http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/1923968 <i>Information Processing & Management, Vol. 42, No. 3. (May 2006), pp. 785-804.</i><br /><br />Over the past few years, data mining has moved from corporations to other organizations. This paper looks at the integration of data mining in digital library services. First, bibliomining, or the combination of bibliometrics and data mining techniques to understand library services, is defined and the concept explored. Second, the conceptual frameworks for bibliomining from the viewpoint of the library decision-maker and the library researcher are presented and compared. Finally, a research agenda to resolve many of the common bibliomining issues and to move the field forward in a mindful manner is developed. The result is not only a roadmap for understanding the integration of data mining in digital library services, but also a template for other cross-discipline data mining researchers to follow for systematic exploration in their own subject domains. The basis for bibliomining: Frameworks for bringing together usage-based data mining and bibliometrics through data warehousing in digital library services Scott Nicholson doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2005.05.008 Information Processing & Management, Vol. 42, No. 3. (May 2006), pp. 785-804. 2007-11-15T21:13:05-00:00 2006 Information Processing & Management 42 3 785 804 bibliometrics lis http://www.citeulike.org/user/kharke/article/2910583 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 76, No. 1. (16 July 2008), pp. 125-133.</i><br /><br />Abstract  Scientific journals represent a significant and growing part of the libraries and many researchers have attempted to measure their use by various methodological approaches till date. In this paper, the author reviews the methodologies employed by researchers working on scientific journals usage. It aims to present an overall picture of the research methods used in the area, in a way that will be of value to anyone seeking to study scientific journals. The author reviews four main research methodologies which are being used for profiling scientific journals usage including questionnaire, interview, citation analysis and transaction log analysis. How do we measure the use of scientific journals? A note on research methodologies Golnessa Moghaddam Mostafa Moballeghi doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1901-y Scientometrics, Vol. 76, No. 1. (16 July 2008), pp. 125-133. 2008-06-20T14:10:25-00:00 2008 Scientometrics 76 1 125 133 bibliometrics citation_analysis e-metrics eresource_management informationbehavior lis http://www.citeulike.org/user/karipuf/article/2367226 <i>(23 Dec 2006)</i><br /><br />Academic institutions, federal agencies, publishers, editors, authors, and librarians increasingly rely on citation analysis for making hiring, promotion, tenure, funding, and/or reviewer and journal evaluation and selection decisions. The Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI) citation databases have been used for decades as a starting point and often as the only tools for locating citations and/or conducting citation analyses. ISI databases (or Web of Science), however, may no longer be adequate as the only or even the main sources of citations because new databases and tools that allow citation searching are now available. Whether these new databases and tools complement or represent alternatives to Web of Science (WoS) is important to explore. Using a group of 15 library and information science faculty members as a case study, this paper examines the effects of using Scopus and Google Scholar (GS) on the citation counts and rankings of scholars as measured by WoS. The paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of WoS, Scopus, and GS, their overlap and uniqueness, quality and language of the citations, and the implications of the findings for citation analysis. The project involved citation searching for approximately 1,100 scholarly works published by the study group and over 200 works by a test group (an additional 10 faculty members). Overall, more than 10,000 citing and purportedly citing documents were examined. WoS data took about 100 hours of collecting and processing time, Scopus consumed 200 hours, and GS a grueling 3,000 hours. A New Era in Citation and Bibliometric Analyses: Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar Lokman Meho Kiduk Yang (23 Dec 2006) 2008-02-12T21:41:35-00:00 2006 bibliometrics scientometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/karipuf/article/2367197 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 74, No. 2. (29 February 2008), pp. 257-271.</i><br /><br />Abstract  This paper compares the h-indices of a list of highly-cited Israeli researchers based on citations counts retrieved from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar respectively. In several case the results obtained through Google Scholar are considerably different from the results based on the Web of Science and Scopus. Data cleansing is discussed extensively. Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar Judit Bar-Ilan doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y Scientometrics, Vol. 74, No. 2. (29 February 2008), pp. 257-271. 2008-02-12T21:25:36-00:00 2008 Scientometrics 74 2 257 271 bibliometrics scientometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/karipuf/article/1475340 <i>(2007), pp. 453-458.</i> Mapping Modern Science Using Co-citation Analysis Ayaka Saka Masatsura Igami doi:10.1109/IV.2007.77 (2007), pp. 453-458. 2007-07-23T15:18:24-00:00 2007 453 458 IEEE Computer Society bibliometrics forecasting-technologies technology-forecasting http://www.citeulike.org/user/karipuf/article/2637854 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 56, No. 2. (16 February 2003), pp. 223-232.</i><br /><br />Abstract  Simonton"s (1997) model of creative productivity, based on a blind variation-selection process, predicts scientific impact can only be evaluated retrospectively, after recognition has been achieved. We test this hypothesis using bibliometric data from the Human Factors journal, which gives an award for the best paper published each year. If Simonton"s model is correct, award winning papers would not be cited much more frequently than non-award winning papers, showing that scientific success cannot be judged prospectively. The results generally confirm Simonton"s model. Receipt of the award increases the citation rate of articles, but accounts for only 0.8% to 1.2% of the variance in the citation rate. Consistent with Simonton"s model, the influence of the award on citation rate may reflect a selection process of an elite group of reviewers who are representative of the larger peer group that eventually determines the citation rate of the article. Consistent with Simonton"s model, author productivity accounts for far more variance in the authors" total citation rate (58.9%) and in the citation rate of the authors" most cited article (12.6%) than does award receipt. Can scientific impact be judged prospectively? A bibliometric test of Simonton"s model of creative productivity John Lee Kim Vicente Andrea Cassano Anna Shearer doi:10.1023/A:1021967111530 Scientometrics, Vol. 56, No. 2. (16 February 2003), pp. 223-232. 2008-04-07T14:30:36-00:00 2003 Scientometrics 56 2 223 232 bibliometrics http://www.citeulike.org/user/karipuf/article/128 <i>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, Vol. 98, No. 2. (16 January 2001), pp. 404-409.</i><br /><br />The structure of scientific collaboration networks is investigated. Two scientists are considered connected if they have authored a paper together and explicit networks of such connections are constructed by using data drawn from a number of databases, including MEDLINE (biomedical research), the Los Alamos e-Print Archive (physics), and NCSTRL (computer science). I show that these collaboration networks form "small worlds," in which randomly chosen pairs of scientists are typically separated by only a short path of intermediate acquaintances. I further give results for mean and distribution of numbers of collaborators of authors, demonstrate the presence of clustering in the networks, and highlight a number of apparent differences in the patterns of collaboration between the fields studied. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. ME Newman doi:10.1073/pnas.021544898 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, Vol. 98, No. 2. (16 January 2001), pp. 404-409. 2004-11-22T00:17:30-00:00 2001 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 0027-8424 98 2 404 409 bibliometrics forecasting-technologies technology-forecasting http://www.citeulike.org/user/KAllendoerfer/article/149266 <i>(2005), pp. 98-105.</i> The centrality of pivotal points in the evolution of scientific networks Chaomei Chen doi:10.1145/1040830.1040859 (2005), pp. 98-105. 2005-04-04T15:22:52-00:00 2005 98 105 ACM Press bibliometrics visualization http://www.citeulike.org/user/jronallo/article/1283566 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 54, No. 12. (2003), pp. 1081-1090.</i><br /><br />This research creates an intelligent agent for automated collection development in a digital library setting. It uses a predictive model based on facets of each Web page to select scholarly works. The criteria came from the academic library selection literature, and a Delphi study was used to refine the list to 41 criteria. A Perl program was designed to analyze a Web page for each criterion and applied to a large collection of scholarly and nonscholarly Web pages. Bibliomining, or data mining for libraries, was then used to create different classification models. Four techniques were used: logistic regression, nonparametric discriminant analysis, classification trees, and neural networks. Accuracy and return were used to judge the effectiveness of each model on test datasets. In addition, a set of problematic pages that were difficult to classify because of their similarity to scholarly research was gathered and classified using the models. The resulting models could be used in the selection process to automatically create a digital library of Web-based scholarly research works. In addition, the technique can be extended to create a digital library of any type of structured electronic information. Bibliomining for automated collection development in a digital library setting: Using data mining to discover Web-based scholarly research works Scott Nicholson doi:10.1002/asi.10313 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 54, No. 12. (2003), pp. 1081-1090. 2007-05-08T12:30:41-00:00 2003 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 12 1081 1090 bibliometrics directed_readings library p http://www.citeulike.org/user/jronallo/article/709911 <i>Bull Med Libr Assoc, Vol. 80, No. 2. (April 1992), pp. 150-156.</i><br /><br />Librarians have used bibliometrics for many years to assess collections and to provide data for making selection and deselection decisions. With the advent of new technology--specifically, CD-ROM databases and reprint file database management programs--new cost-effective procedures can be developed. This paper describes a recent multidisciplinary study conducted by two library faculty members and one allied health faculty member to test a bibliometric method that used the MEDLINE and CINAHL databases on CD-ROM and the Papyrus database management program to produce a new collection development methodology. Combining new technologies for effective collection development: a bibliometric study using CD-ROM and a database management program. JF Burnham BS Shearer JC Wall Bull Med Libr Assoc, Vol. 80, No. 2. (April 1992), pp. 150-156. 2006-06-25T10:24:27-00:00 1992 Bull Med Libr Assoc 0025-7338 80 2 150 156 bibliometrics library sdr http://www.citeulike.org/user/hpiwowar/article/2625974 <i>AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings / AMIA Symposium. AMIA Symposium (2005), pp. 724-728.</i><br /><br />This article presents a description and case study of CiteSpace II, a Java application which supports visual exploration with knowledge discovery in bibliographic databases. Highly cited and pivotal documents, areas of specialization within a knowledge domain, and emergence of research topics are visually mapped through a progressive knowledge domain visualization approach to detecting and visualizing trends and patterns in scientific literature. The test case in this study is progressive knowledge domain visualization of the field of medical informatics. Datasets based on publications from twelve journals in the medical informatics field covering the time period from 1964-2004 were extracted from PubMed and Web of Science (WOS) and developed as testbeds for evaluation of the CiteSpace system. Two resulting document-term co-citation and MeSH term co-occurrence visualizations are qualitatively evaluated for identification of pivotal documents, areas of specialization, and research trends. Practical applications in bio-medical research settings are discussed. CiteSpace II: visualization and knowledge discovery in bibliographic databases. MB Synnestvedt C Chen JH Holmes AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings / AMIA Symposium. AMIA Symposium (2005), pp. 724-728. 2008-04-03T12:45:45-00:00 2005 AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings / AMIA Symposium. AMIA Symposium 1559-4076 724 728 all bibliometrics citations mesh nlp trends visualization http://www.citeulike.org/user/hpiwowar/article/2627154 <i>Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, Vol. 14, No. 3. (n 2007), pp. 340-348.</i><br /><br />OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research is to learn how the editorial staffs of bioinformatics and medical informatics journals provide support for cross-community exposure. Models such as co-citation and co-author analysis measure the relationships between researchers; but they do not capture how environments that support knowledge transfer across communities are organized. METHODS: In this paper, we propose a social network analysis model to study how editorial boards integrate researchers from disparate communities. We evaluate our model by building relational networks based on the editorial boards of approximately 40 journals that serve as research outlets in medical informatics and bioinformatics. We track the evolution of editorial relationships through a longitudinal investigation over the years 2000 through 2005. RESULTS: Our findings suggest that there are research journals that support the collocation of editorial board members from the bioinformatics and medical informatics communities. Network centrality metrics indicate that editorial board members are located in the intersection of the communities and that the number of individuals in the intersection is growing with time. CONCLUSIONS: Social network analysis methods provide insight into the relationships between the medical informatics and bioinformatics communities. The number of editorial board members facilitating the publication intersection of the communities has grown, but the intersection remains dependent on a small group of individuals and fragile. A longitudinal social network analysis of the editorial boards of medical informatics and bioinformatics journals. B Malin K Carley doi:10.1197/jamia.M2228 Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, Vol. 14, No. 3. (n 2007), pp. 340-348. 2008-04-03T17:43:59-00:00 2007 Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 1067-5027 14 3 340 348 all bibliometrics bioinformatics citations evaluation http://www.citeulike.org/user/hpiwowar/article/2738813 <i>Nature, Vol. 415, No. 6873. (14 February 2002), pp. 726-729.</i> Citation analysis: The counting house David Adam doi:10.1038/415726a Nature, Vol. 415, No. 6873. (14 February 2002), pp. 726-729. 2008-04-30T14:40:39-00:00 2002 Nature 415 6873 726 729 all bibliometrics citation editorial http://www.citeulike.org/user/hpiwowar/article/761350 <i>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, Vol. 101 Suppl 1 (6 April 2004), pp. 5200-5205.</i><br /><br />By using data from three bibliographic databases in biology, physics, and mathematics, respectively, networks are constructed in which the nodes are scientists, and two scientists are connected if they have coauthored a paper. We use these networks to answer a broad variety of questions about collaboration patterns, such as the numbers of papers authors write, how many people they write them with, what the typical distance between scientists is through the network, and how patterns of collaboration vary between subjects and over time. We also summarize a number of recent results by other authors on coauthorship patterns. Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. ME Newman doi:10.1073/pnas.0307545100 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, Vol. 101 Suppl 1 (6 April 2004), pp. 5200-5205. 2006-07-16T18:42:36-00:00 2004 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 0027-8424 101 Suppl 1 5200 5205 all bibliometrics citations collaboration evaluation http://www.citeulike.org/user/hpiwowar/article/2855364 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 69, No. 3. (23 December 2006), pp. 575-589.</i><br /><br />Summary  Analysing co-authored publications has become the standard way to measure research collaborations. At the same time bibliometric researchers have advised that co-authorship based indicators should be handled with care as a source of evidence on actual scientific collaboration. The aim of this study is to assess how well university-industry collaborations can be identified and described using co-authorship data. This is done through a comparison of co-authorship data with industrial funding to a medical university. In total 436 companies were identified through the two methods. Our results show that one third of the companies that have provided funding to the university had not co-authored any publications with the university. Further, the funding indicator identified only 16% of the companies that had co-authored publications. Thus, both co-authorship and funding indicators provide incomplete results. We also observe a case of conflicting trends between funding and co-authorship indicators. We conclude that uncritical use of the two indicators may lead to misinterpretation of the development of collaborations and thus provide incorrect data for decision-making. Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding Jonas Lundberg Göran Tomson Inger Lundkvist John Sk?r Mats Brommels doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0170-5 Scientometrics, Vol. 69, No. 3. (23 December 2006), pp. 575-589. 2008-06-01T21:09:26-00:00 2006 Scientometrics 69 3 575 589 all bibliometrics collaboration data-sharing evaluation