ArticleHeliyon2020
The k-index is introduced to replace the h-index to evaluate better the scientific excellence of individuals.
Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- #SharingHEOR: Developing Modern Media for Communication and Dissemination of Health Economics and Outcomes Research.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Article
- Defining quantitative rules for identifying influential researchers: Insights from mathematics domain.Heliyon · 2024Article
- A figure of merit that includes 5 distinct performance indicators to improve research evaluation of academic scholars'.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Scientific career tracks and publication performance - relationships discovered in the Hungarian academic promotion system.Heliyon · 2022Article
- H-Index Anxiety Among Health Researchers: A Commentary.International journal of preventive medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The best possible methods are needed to evaluate the scientific excellence of individuals and research groups in order to award positions and distribute research grants with higher efficiency. It is shown here that for the symmetrical distribution of citations of an individual the currently used h-index is approximately half of the square root of the total number of citations, according to the rule of Hirsch. It is also shown that deviations from this "ideal" h-index are common and they are due to deviations in the citation distributions of different individuals. However, those deviations are not characteristic for the scientific excellence of an individual and therefore they lead only to confusion in scientific evaluation. Therefore the h-index is suggested here to be replaced by the k-index. The k-index of an individual is calculated from his/her all independent citations as self-citations cannot be considered as an indication of the excellence of any paper or its authors (the citation is independent if there is no overlap in the lists of authors of the citing and the cited paper). The k-index takes into account only partial citations for each author of multi-authored papers. In ideal case the shares of the authors in a paper are published in the same paper similarly as shares of the inventors are published in patents. If not, the share of each co-author is taken equal to the inverse of the number of authors of the given paper. The k-index of an individual is defined as the square root from the sum of his/her independent partial citations. The value of the k-index is dependent on the databank used for the citations and on the time of the measurement. If scientists of similar age working in similar fields are compared using the same databank, their personal scientific excellence will be proportional to their k-index. When the k-index is divided by the number of active scientific years, a correction can be made for different ages of different applicants. In average, the k-index has similar values, but a wider range compared to the h-index. More importantly the k-index is not biased by this or that type of citation distribution of an individual, not biased by the self-citations and not biased by the results of the co-authors. The squares of k-indexes of smaller units are additive, and so the k-index is extended to journals, publishing houses, departments, institutions, countries, continents and to the mankind.
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.