Suppr超能文献

理解传统研究影响指标。

Understanding Traditional Research Impact Metrics.

作者信息

Butler Joseph S, Sebastian Arjun S, Kaye I David, Wagner Scott C, Morrissey Patrick B, Schroeder Gregory D, Kepler Christopher K, Vaccaro Alexander R

机构信息

Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.

出版信息

Clin Spine Surg. 2017 May;30(4):164-166. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000530.

Abstract

Traditionally, the success of a researcher has been judged by the number of publications he or she has published in peer-review, indexed, high impact journals. However, to quantify the impact of research in the wider scientific community, a number of traditional metrics have been used, including Impact Factor, SCImago Journal Rank, Eigenfactor Score, and Article Influence Score. This article attempts to provide a broad overview of the main traditional impact metrics that have been used to assess scholarly output and research impact. We determine that there is no perfect all-encompassing metric to measure research impact, and, in the modern era, no single traditional metric is capable of accommodating all facets of research impact. Academics and researchers should be aware of the advantages and limitations of traditional metrics and should be judicious when selecting any metrics for an objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.

摘要

传统上,研究者的成功是根据其在同行评审、被索引的高影响力期刊上发表的论文数量来评判的。然而,为了量化研究在更广泛科学界的影响力,人们使用了一些传统指标,包括影响因子、Scimago期刊排名、特征因子得分和论文影响得分。本文试图对用于评估学术产出和研究影响力的主要传统影响指标进行全面概述。我们认为,不存在一个完美的、涵盖所有方面的指标来衡量研究影响力,在现代,没有单一的传统指标能够涵盖研究影响力的所有方面。学者和研究人员应该意识到传统指标的优点和局限性,在选择任何指标以客观评估学术产出和研究影响力时都应该谨慎。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验