For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
165
views
16
references
 Top references
cited by
77
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
1
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      33
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact

      discussion
      Author(s): 1 , 2 , *
      Publication date (Electronic):
      Journal: PLoS Biology
      Publisher: Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The authors discuss the value of article-level metrics in determining an article's scientific impact.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation: Journals can be ranked by frequency and impact of citations for science policy studies

          R Garfield (1972)
          Article 0 comments Cited 312 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures

            Johan Bollen, Herbert Van de Sompel, Aric Hagberg … (2009)
            Background The impact of scientific publications has traditionally been expressed in terms of citation counts. However, scientific activity has moved online over the past decade. To better capture scientific impact in the digital era, a variety of new impact measures has been proposed on the basis of social network analysis and usage log data. Here we investigate how these new measures relate to each other, and how accurately and completely they express scientific impact. Methodology We performed a principal component analysis of the rankings produced by 39 existing and proposed measures of scholarly impact that were calculated on the basis of both citation and usage log data. Conclusions Our results indicate that the notion of scientific impact is a multi-dimensional construct that can not be adequately measured by any single indicator, although some measures are more suitable than others. The commonly used citation Impact Factor is not positioned at the core of this construct, but at its periphery, and should thus be used with caution.
            Article 0 comments Cited 126 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Impact Factor Game

              Virginia Barbour (2006)
              The PLoS Medicine editors argue that we need a better measure than the impact factor for assessing the biomedical literature.
              Article 0 comments Cited 125 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): PLoS Biol
                Journal ID (publisher-id): plos
                Journal ID (pmc): plosbiol
                Title: PLoS Biology
                Publisher: Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                ISSN (Print): 1544-9173
                ISSN (Electronic): 1545-7885
                Publication date Collection: November 2009
                Publication date (Print): November 2009
                Publication date (Electronic): 17 November 2009
                Volume: 7
                Issue: 11
                Electronic Location Identifier: e1000242
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Science and Technology Facilities Council, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
                [2 ]23andMe, Mountain View, California, United States of America
                Author notes

                The Perspective section provides experts with a forum to comment on topical or controversial issues of broad interest.

                Article
                Publisher ID: 09-PLBI-PS-3615R2
                DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000242
                PMC ID: 2768794
                PubMed ID: 19918558
                SO-VID: 80a32b4f-b6ac-415d-a768-bb6b1594e352
                Copyright © Neylon, Wu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
                History
                Page count
                Pages: 6
                Categories
                Subject: Perspective
                Subject: Science Policy

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Life sciences
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Life sciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content33

                See all similar

                Cited by66

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors126

                See all reference authors