ArticlePeerJ2013
Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
Article in PeerJ, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Forensic age estimation using computed tomography of the medial clavicular epiphysis: a systematic review.International journal of legal medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Article
- A Summary on Tuberculosis Vaccine Development-Where to Go?Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Measuring Scholarly Productivity: A Primer for Junior Faculty. Part III: Understanding Publication Metrics.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2018Review
- H-index in medicine is driven by original research.Croatian medical journal · 2018Article
- Evaluation of Founding Members of the International Academy of Health Sciences Informatics (IAHSI) Based on Google Scholar and Scopus Parameters.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2017Article
- Evaluation of the Medical Academic Community of Bosnia and Herzegovina Based on Scopus Parameters.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2017Article
- Scientometric Dilemma: Is H-index Adequate for Scientific Validity of Academic's Work?Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2016Article
- Analysis of ten years of publishing in Pharmacy Practice.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Citation metrics and h indices differ using different bibliometric databases. We compiled the number of publications, number of citations, h index and year since the first publication from 340 soil researchers from all over the world. On average, Google Scholar has the highest h index, number of publications and citations per researcher, and the Web of Science the lowest. The number of papers in Google Scholar is on average 2.3 times higher and the number of citations is 1.9 times higher compared to the data in the Web of Science. Scopus metrics are slightly higher than that of the Web of Science. The h index in Google Scholar is on average 1.4 times larger than Web of Science, and the h index in Scopus is on average 1.1 times larger than Web of Science. Over time, the metrics increase in all three databases but fastest in Google Scholar. The h index of an individual soil scientist is about 0.7 times the number of years since his/her first publication. There is a large difference between the number of citations, number of publications and the h index using the three databases. From this analysis it can be concluded that the choice of the database affects widely-used citation and evaluation metrics but that bibliometric transfer functions exist to relate the metrics from these three databases. We also investigated the relationship between journal's impact factor and Google Scholar's h5-index. The h5-index is a better measure of a journal's citation than the 2 or 5 year window impact factor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.