H Index and scientific output of researchers in medicine from the University of Guadalajara, Mexico
Main Article Content
Keywords
Mexico, Citation databases, Bibliometrics, Biomedical research
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate by the h index the scientific output of researchers from the University of Guadalajara who belong to the Sistema Nacional de Investigadores in the field of Medicine and Health Sciences.
Methods: Researchers from the University of Guadalajara were selected from the Active SNI Researchers 2013 file. The scientific output of researchers in the fields of Medicine/Health Sciences and Biology/Chemistry was evaluated using the h index estimated by the Scopus website. A sample of capital researchers and Emeritus scientists was taken to perform the same procedure and compare data.
Results: The total number of researchers in the University of Guadalajara who are members of the SNI was 711, of which 67.2 % were level I and in less proportion were level II and III. Only 24.2 % of them were classified in the fields of Medicine/Health Sciences and Biology/Chemistry. The average h index value of researchers level I, II and III in Medicine/Health Sciences field was 5.4, 10.5 and 14.5, respectively. Capital and Emeritus scientists had an average h index of 23.4 and 19.8, respectively.
Conclusion: The h index measures the quantity and quality of the scientific output and it also avoids bias in the evaluation process. It should be useful for future evaluations of the SNI members and for medical doctors who sign up for the National Academy of Medicine.
References
García-Pachón E, Padilla-Navas I. El factor de impacto y el índice h de las revistas biomédicas españolas. Med Clin (Barc). 2013.
Editorial. Not-so-deep impact. Research assessment rests too heavily on the inflated status of the impact factor.Nature.2005;435:1003–1004.
www.conacyt.gob.mx/sni/paginas/default.aspx
Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. PNAS. 2005;102:16569-16572.
Costas R, Bordons M. The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. J Informetrics. 2007;1: 193-203.5.
http://www.udg.mx/historia
Romero AH, García A, Kiwi M. Evaluation of the scientific impact, productivity and biological age based upon the h-index in three Latin American countries: the materials science case. Ann Phys (Berlin). 2009; 18:198-205.
Minasny B, Hartemink AE, McBratney A, Hang H. Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.Peer J. 2013;1: e183.
Cabezas-Clavijo A, Delgado-López-Cózar E. Google Scholar e índice h en biomedicina: la popularización de la evaluación bibliométrica. Med Intensiva. 2013;37:343-354.
Kellner AWA, Ponciano LCMO. H-index in the Brazilian Academy of Sciences – comments and concerns. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2008;80:771-781.
Rivera H. El índice h: criterio necesario en la evaluación de investigadores. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2011;49:123-124.