ArticlePloS one2024
Possibilities for ranking business schools and considerations concerning the stability of such rankings.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this article, we discuss possibilities for ranking business schools and analyse the stability of research rankings using different ranking methods. One focus is set on a comparison of publication-based rankings with citation-based rankings. Our considerations and discussions are based on a (small) case study for which we have examined all (six) business schools at public universities in Austria. The innovative aspect of our article is the chosen mix of methods and the explicit comparison of the results of a publication analysis with those of a citation analysis. In addition, we have developed a new indicator to check the stability of the obtained ranking results with regard to the individual business schools. The results show that the ranks of the individual business schools are quite stable. Nevertheless, we found some differences between publication-based and citation-based rankings. In both cases, however, the choice of the data source as well as switching from full to adjusted counting only have little impact on the ranking results. The main contribution of our approach to research in the field of university rankings is that it shows that focusing on a single (overall) indicator should be avoided, as this can easily lead to bias. Instead, different (partial) indicators should be calculated side by side to provide a more complete picture.
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.