Cabezas-Clavijo A, Delgado-López-Cózar E
EC3: Evaluación de la Ciencia y de la Comunicación Científica, Departamento de Información y Comunicación, Facultad de Comunicación y Documentación, Universidad de Granada, Granada, España.
Med Intensiva. 2013 Jun-Jul;37(5):343-54. doi: 10.1016/j.medin.2013.01.008. Epub 2013 Mar 19.
The aim of this study is to review the features, benefits and limitations of the new scientific evaluation products derived from Google Scholar, such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations, as well as the h-index, which is the standard bibliometric indicator adopted by these services. The study also outlines the potential of this new database as a source for studies in Biomedicine, and compares the h-index obtained by the most relevant journals and researchers in the field of intensive care medicine, based on data extracted from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Results show that although the average h-index values in Google Scholar are almost 30% higher than those obtained in Web of Science, and about 15% higher than those collected by Scopus, there are no substantial changes in the rankings generated from one data source or the other. Despite some technical problems, it is concluded that Google Scholar is a valid tool for researchers in Health Sciences, both for purposes of information retrieval and for the computation of bibliometric indicators.
本研究旨在回顾源自谷歌学术的新科学评估产品的特点、优势和局限性，如谷歌学术指标和谷歌学术引用次数，以及h指数（这些服务所采用的标准文献计量指标）。该研究还概述了这个新数据库作为生物医学研究来源的潜力，并基于从科学引文索引（Web of Science）、Scopus和谷歌学术中提取的数据，比较了重症医学领域最具相关性的期刊和研究人员所获得的h指数。结果显示，尽管谷歌学术中的平均h指数值比科学引文索引中获得的值高出近30%，比Scopus收集的值高出约15%，但从一个数据源或另一个数据源生成的排名并无实质性变化。尽管存在一些技术问题，但得出的结论是，谷歌学术对于健康科学领域的研究人员而言，无论是在信息检索还是文献计量指标计算方面，都是一个有效的工具。
