Batooli Zahra, Ravandi Somaye Nadi, Bidgoli Mohammad Sabahi
Health Information Management Research Center, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran; Ph.D. Student of Knowledge & Information Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Ph.D. of Library and Information Sciences, Health Information Management Research Center, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Electron Physician. 2016 Feb 25;8(2):2048-56. doi: 10.19082/2048. eCollection 2016 Feb.
INTRODUCTION: It is essential to evaluate the impact of scientific publications through citation analysis in citation indexes. In addition, scientometric measures of social media also should be assessed. These measures include how many times the publications were read, viewed, and downloaded. The present study aimed to assess the scientific output of scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014 based on scientometric measures of Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. METHODS: A survey method was used to study the articles published in Scopus journals by scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014. The required data were collected from Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Also, the Spearman correlation was used between the number of views of articles in ResearchGate with citation number of the articles in Scopus and reading frequency of the articles in Mendeley with citation number in Scopus were examined using the Spearman correlation in SPSS 16. RESULTS: Five-hundred and thirty-three articles were indexed in the Scopus Citation Database by the end of March 2014. Collectively, those articles were cited 1,315 times. The articles were covered by ResearchGate (74%) more than Mendeley (44%). In addition, 98% of the articles indexed in ResearchGate and 92% of the articles indexed in Mendeley were viewed at least once. The results showed that there was a positive correlation between the number of views of the articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley and the number of citations of the articles in Scopus. CONCLUSION: Coverage and the number of visitors were higher in ResearchGate than in Mendeley. The increase in the number of views of articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley also increased the number of citations of the papers. Social networks, such as ResearchGate and Mendeley, also can be used as tools for the evaluation of academics and scholars based on the scientific research they have conducted.
引言:通过引用索引中的引用分析来评估科学出版物的影响至关重要。此外,社交媒体的科学计量指标也应予以评估。这些指标包括出版物的阅读、浏览和下载次数。本研究旨在基于Scopus、ResearchGate和Mendeley的科学计量指标,评估截至2014年3月底设拉子医科大学学者的科研产出。 方法:采用调查方法研究截至2014年3月底设拉子医科大学学者在Scopus期刊上发表的文章。所需数据从Scopus、ResearchGate和Mendeley收集。数据采用描述性统计进行分析。此外,使用Spearman相关性分析ResearchGate中文章的浏览次数与Scopus中文章的被引次数之间的关系,以及Mendeley中文章的阅读频率与Scopus中文章的被引次数之间的关系,在SPSS 16中使用Spearman相关性进行检验。 结果:截至2014年3月底,Scopus引文数据库中收录了533篇文章。这些文章总共被引用了1315次。ResearchGate对这些文章的覆盖比例(74%)高于Mendeley(44%)。此外,ResearchGate中索引的文章有98%、Mendeley中索引的文章有92%至少被浏览过一次。结果表明,ResearchGate和Mendeley中文章的浏览次数与Scopus中文章的被引次数之间存在正相关。 结论:ResearchGate的覆盖范围和访问者数量高于Mendeley。ResearchGate和Mendeley中文章浏览次数的增加也增加了论文的被引次数。ResearchGate和Mendeley等社交网络也可作为基于学者所开展的科研对其进行评估的工具。
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2020-10-22
J Educ Health Promot. 2018-2-9
IBRO Neurosci Rep. 2021-12-2
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019-3-29
J Adv Nurs. 2019-1-24
J Med Internet Res. 2020-7-6
Br Dent J. 2018-7-13
J Korean Med Sci. 2017-11
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017-6