Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Institutional h-index: The performance of a new metric in the evaluation of Brazilian Psychiatric Post-graduation Programs

  • 262 Accesses

  • 26 Citations

Abstract

A fair assessment of merit is needed for better resource allocation in the scientific community. We analyzed the performance of the institutional h-index in the case of Brazilian Psychiatry Post-graduation Programs. Traditional bibliometric indicators and the institutional h-index similarly ranked the programs, except for the Average Impact Factor. The institutional h-index correlated strongly with the majority of the traditional bibliometric indicators, which did not occur with the Average Impact Factor. The institutional h-index balances “quantity” and “quality”, and can be used as part of a panel of bibliometric indicators to aid the peer-review process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Amin, M., Mabe, M. (2000), Impact factors: use and abuse. Perspectives in Publishing, No. 1, Elsevier Science (http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/editorsinfo.editors/perspectives)

  2. Bornmann, L., Daniel, H.-D. (2005), Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics, 65: 391–392.

  3. Bornmann, L., Daniel, H.-D. (2007), Convergent validation of peer review decisions using the h index. Extent of and reasons for type I and type II errors, Journal of Informetrics, 1: 204–213.

  4. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A. (2005), A Hirsch-type index for journals, The Scientist, 19: 8.

  5. Bressan, R. A., Gerolin, J., Mari, J. J. (2005), The modest but growing Brazilian presence in psychiatric, psychobiological and mental health research: assessment of the 1998–2002 period, Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 38: 649–659.

  6. Cheek, J., Garnham, B., Quan, J. (2006), What’s in a number? Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research(ers). Qualitative Health Research, 16: 423–435.

  7. Costas, R., Bordons, M. (2007), The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level, Journal of Informetrics, 1: 193–203.

  8. Cronin, B., Meho, L. I. (2006), Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57: 1275–1278.

  9. Dainesi, S. M., Pietrobon, R. (2007), Scientific indicators of productivity: Time for action, Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, 29: 100–101.

  10. De Meis, L., Velloso, A., Lannes, D., Carmo, M. S., De Meis, C. (2003), The growing competition in Brazilian science: rites of passage, stress and burnout, Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 36: 1135–1141.

  11. Döring, T. F. (2007), Quality evaluation needs some better quality tools, Nature, 445: 709.

  12. Garfield, E. (1983A), How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluation and when is it relevant? Part I, Current Contents, 44: 5–13.

  13. Garfield, E. (1983B), How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluation and when is it relevant? Part 2, Current Contents, 45: 5–14.

  14. Garfield, E. (1998), From citation indexes to informetrics: is the tail now wagging the dog? Libri, 48: 67–80.

  15. Glänzel, W. (2006), On the opportunities and limitations of the h-index, Science Focus, 1: 10–11.

  16. Hecht, F., Hecht, B. K., Sandberg, A. A. (1998), The journal “impact factor”: a misnamed, misleading, misused measure, Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics, 104: 77–81.

  17. Hirsch, J. E., (2005), An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102: 16569–16572.

  18. Holden, G., Rosenberg, G., Barker, K., Onghena, P. (2006), An assessment of the predictive validity of impact factor scores: Implications for academic employment decisions in social work, Research on Social Work Practice, 16: 613–624.

  19. Meho, L. I., Sonnenwald, D. H. (2000), Citation ranking versus peer evaluation of senior faculty research performance — a case-study of Kurdish scholarship, Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 51: 123–138.

  20. Meneghini, R., Packer, A. L. (2006), Articles with authors affiliated to Brazilian institutions published from 1994 to 2003 with 100 or more citations: II — identification of thematic nuclei of excellence in Brazilian science, Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciência, 78: 855–883.

  21. Mulligan, A. (2004), Is peer review in crisis? Perspectives in publishing, No. 2. Elsevier Science (http://www.elsevier.com/).

  22. Plos Medicine Editors (2006), The impact factor game: it is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature, PLOS Medicine, 3: e291.

  23. Prathap, G., (2006), Hirsch-type indices for ranking institutions’ scientific research output, Current Science, 91: 1439–1440.

  24. Rogers, D. W. O., Hendee, W. R., Orton, C. G. (2006), Scientific citation indices are useful in evaluating medical physicists for promotion and tenure, Medical Physics, 33: 1–3.

  25. Saad, G. (2006), Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively, Scientometrics, 69: 117–120.

  26. Sampaio, F. (2006), Surgical research, “stricto sensu” post graduate course and assessment system of CAPES, Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, 33: 343.

  27. Seglen, P. O. (1997), Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research, British Medical Journal, 707: 498–502.

  28. Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros D., Manolopoulos, Y. (2007), Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks, Scientometrics, 72: 253–280.

  29. van Raan, A. J. (2006), Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups, Scientometrics, 67: 491–502.

  30. Zanotto, E. D. (2006), The scientists pyramid, Scientometrics, 69: 175–181.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Mariana Pires Da Luz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Da Luz, M.P., Marques-Portella, C., Mendlowicz, M. et al. Institutional h-index: The performance of a new metric in the evaluation of Brazilian Psychiatric Post-graduation Programs. Scientometrics 77, 361–368 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1964-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Citation Rate
  • Bibliometric Indicator
  • Average Impact Factor
  • Brazilian Science
  • Scientific Research Output