Hassan Waseem, Paas Fred
Institute of Chemical Sciences, University of Peshawar, Peshawar, 25120, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
Department of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2025 May;398(5):6123-6128. doi: 10.1007/s00210-024-03648-w. Epub 2024 Dec 3.
This study offers insights into a paper by the esteemed editor-in-chief, who conducted a bibliometric comparison of Nobel laureates in physiology, medicine, and chemistry to examine the substantial influence these scientists have had on their respective fields (Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Arch Pharmacol, 397, 2024, 7169-7185). Analyzing metrics such as laureates' nationalities, ages at productivity peaks, H-index, and age-adjusted H-index, the research highlights distinct career patterns among these distinguished scientists. The present study addresses the limitations of traditional metrics, like the H-index, which may undervalue early-career contributions or multidisciplinary impacts due to its focus on cumulative citations. Alternative indicators such as the H-upper, H-center, and H-tail indices are proposed to capture more balanced aspects of scholarly influence, highlighting top-cited, moderately cited, and broadly influential work, respectively. This study also suggests the value of incorporating composite indices such as the HG-composite and Q2 indices in relevant future studies. A list of other indicators is also provided, which may be employed in similar studies. In the same vein, altmetrics, such as social media engagement, download counts, and mentions in digital and traditional media, further complement these metrics by illustrating the broader, more immediate societal relevance of Nobel laureates' work. The present study proposes a multi-dimensional approach for evaluating research impact, integrating various metrics, and highlighting the need for cross-database comparisons to ensure accurate assessments.
本研究深入探讨了一位备受尊敬的主编所撰写的一篇论文，该主编对生理学、医学和化学领域的诺贝尔奖获得者进行了文献计量比较，以考察这些科学家对各自领域产生的重大影响（《瑙尼恩-施米德贝格药理学文献》，397卷，2024年，7169 - 7185页）。通过分析获奖者的国籍、生产力峰值年龄、H指数和年龄调整后的H指数等指标，该研究突出了这些杰出科学家不同的职业模式。本研究指出了传统指标（如H指数）的局限性，由于其专注于累积引用次数，可能会低估早期职业贡献或多学科影响。建议采用诸如H上限指数、H中心指数和H尾指数等替代指标，以更全面地捕捉学术影响力的各个方面，分别突出高被引、中等被引和广泛有影响力的工作。本研究还表明在未来相关研究中纳入诸如HG综合指数和Q2指数等复合指数的价值。还提供了一份其他指标清单，可用于类似研究。同样，替代计量指标，如社交媒体参与度、下载次数以及在数字和传统媒体中的提及，通过说明诺贝尔奖获得者工作更广泛、更直接的社会相关性，进一步补充了这些指标。本研究提出了一种多维方法来评估研究影响力，整合各种指标，并强调需要进行跨数据库比较以确保准确评估。
