Liu Rui, Liu Qian, Shi Jianwei, Yu Wenya, Gong Xin, Chen Ning, Yang Yan, Huang Jiaoling, Wang Zhaoxin
Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital of Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Ann Transl Med. 2021 Oct;9(20):1580. doi: 10.21037/atm-21-5046.
To deal with the large disparity across disciplines using impact factor, which is widely used in hospitals and has recently come under attack for distorting good scientific practices, we propose a set of systematic methods to improve the equality of research evaluations of various clinical disciplines.
We used bibliometric information on 18 clinical disciplines from 2016 to 2018. We first sought to clarify disciplinary characteristics with the aim of identifying the characteristic fields for each clinical discipline, and we constructed a keyword database. To minimize the disparity across various clinical disciplines, we used normalized evaluation, referring to the calculation of the normalized coefficient of a specific discipline, to enable a relatively clear evaluation across different disciplines.
Feature extraction was performed, and over 700,000 journals were retrieved each year. Using this information, the journal correlation coefficient was calculated. From 2016 to 2018, oncology had the largest normalized coefficient (0.133, 0.136, 0.146 respectively), which reflects the highest correlation between the characteristic journals of the discipline. The findings showed a clear distinction in journal coverage and journal correlations for different disciplines.
The new evaluation indicator and normalized process measure different features of disciplines, providing a basis for the further balancing of evaluations, and considering differences across disciplines.
为应对医院广泛使用的影响因子在各学科间造成的巨大差异，该指标最近因扭曲良好的科学实践而受到抨击，我们提出了一套系统方法来提高各临床学科研究评估的公平性。
我们使用了2016年至2018年18个临床学科的文献计量信息。我们首先试图通过识别各临床学科的特征领域来阐明学科特点，并构建了一个关键词数据库。为了尽量减少各临床学科之间的差异，我们采用了归一化评估，即参考特定学科归一化系数的计算方法，以便在不同学科间进行相对清晰的评估。
进行了特征提取，每年检索超过70万种期刊。利用这些信息，计算了期刊相关系数。2016年至2018年，肿瘤学的归一化系数最大（分别为0.133、0.136、0.146），这反映了该学科特征期刊之间的最高相关性。研究结果表明，不同学科在期刊覆盖范围和期刊相关性方面存在明显差异。
新的评估指标和归一化过程衡量了学科的不同特征，为进一步平衡评估以及考虑学科差异提供了依据。
