Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26985429›Full record

ReviewJournal of research in pharmacy practice

Scientometric analysis: A technical need for medical science researchers either as authors or as peer reviewers.

Izet Masic

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of research in pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Bibliometric Indexes - Advantages and Limitations in Practical Application, for the Scientific Validity of Authors and Their Scientific Contents - Stanford Bibliometric List: Truths and Misconceptions.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2024
    Article
  6. Scientometric analysis of trends in global research on acne treatment.International journal of women's dermatology · 2023
    Article
  7. How Far Goes the Un-ethic of the Authors Who Submit the Articles to the Journals, Or, Better to Say, Their "Scientific Insolence"?Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2023
    Article
  8. Acta Informatica Medica is Reputed Research Journal.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Predatory Journals and Publishers - Dilemmas: How to Assess it and How to Avoid it?Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Relation between Iranian Medical Science Research in PubMed and Burden of Disease.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2016
    Article
  20. 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 · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Izet MasicDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Balkans.
University of Sarajevo · BA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nature of performing a scientific research is a process that has several different components which consist of identifying the key research question(s), choices of scientific approach for the study and data collection, data analysis, and finally reporting on results. Generally, peer review is a series of procedures in the evaluation of a creative work or performance by other people, who work in the same or related field, with the aim of maintaining and improving the quality of work or performance in that field. The assessment of the achievement of every scientist, and thus indirectly determining his reputation in the scientific community of these publications, especially journals, is done through the so-called impact factor index. The impact factor predicts or estimates that how many annual citations article may receive after its publication. Evaluation of scientific productivity and assessment of the published articles of researchers and scientists can be made through the so-called H-index. The quality of published results of scientific work largely depends on knowledge sources that are used in the preparation, which means that it should be considered to serve the purpose and the very relevance of the information used. Scientometrics as a field of science covers all aforementioned issues, and scientometric analysis is obligatory for quality assessment of the scientific validity of published articles and other type of publications.

Indexed as

Scientific publicationsscientific validityscientometrics

Identifiers

PMID26985429
PMCPMC4776541
OpenAlexW2278093536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.