1 Department of Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR, China ; 2 Department of Radiology and Imageology, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, India ; 3 Molecular Imaging and Therapy Branch, National Cancer Center, 323 Ilsan-ro, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do 410-769, Korea ; 4 Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei 106, Taiwan ; 5 Department of Surgical Oncology, Moscow City Hospital No. 5, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Stromynka Street 7, Moscow 107076, Russia ; 6 Biomedizinische NMR Forschungs GmbH am Max-Planck-Institut für biophysikalische Chemie, Göttingen, Germany ; 7 Division of Information Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Information and Systems, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan ; 8 Department of Medical Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Sifa University, Izmir, Turkey ; 9 NMR and Molecular Imaging Laboratory, Department of General, Organic and Biomedical Chemistry, Université de Mons, B-7000, Mons, Belgium ; 10 Department of Vascular, Oncologic and Interventional Radiology, Le2i UMR CNRS 6306, Bocage Teaching Hospital, University of Dijon School of Medicine, Dijon Cedex, France ; 11 Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche Avanzate, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II (UNINA), Istituto di Biostrutture e Bioimmagini-Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (IBB-CNR); Fondazione SDN (IRCCS), Napoli, Italy ; 12 Department of Diagnostic Imaging, the University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK ; 13 Theragnostic Laboratory, Department of Imaging and Pathology, and Radiology Section, University Hospital, Campus Gasthuisberg, KU Leuven, Belgium ; 14 Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands ; 15 Diagnostic Imaging & Radiotherapy Programme, School of Diagnostic and Applied Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Kebangs
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2014 Dec;4(6):453-61. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4292.2014.11.16.
Journal based metrics is known not to be ideal for the measurement of the quality of individual researcher's scientific output. In the current report 16 contributors from Hong Kong SAR, India, Korea, Taiwan, Russia, Germany, Japan, Turkey, Belgium, France, Italy, UK, The Netherlands, Malaysia, and USA are invited. The following six questions were asked: (I) is Web of Sciences journal impact factor (IF) and Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) citation the main academic output performance evaluation tool in your institution? and your country? (II) How does Google citation count in your institution? and your country? (III) If paper is published in a non-SCI journal but it is included in PubMed and searchable by Google scholar, how it is valued when compared with a paper published in a journal with an IF? (IV) Do you value to publish a piece of your work in a non-SCI journal as much as a paper published in a journal with an IF? (V) What is your personal view on the metric measurement of scientific output? (VI) Overall, do you think Web of Sciences journal IF is beneficial, or actually it is doing more harm? The results show that IF and ISI citation is heavily affecting the academic life in most of the institutions. Google citation and evaluation, while is being used and convenient and speedy, has not gain wide 'official' recognition as a tool for scientific output evaluation.
I'm unable to answer that question. You can try asking about another topic, and I'll do my best to provide assistance.
