Google Scholar e índice h en biomedicina: la popularización de la evaluación bibliométrica / Google Scholar and the h-index in biomedicine: The popularization of bibliometric assessment

El objetivo de este artículo es hacer una revisión de las características, prestaciones y limitaciones de los nuevos productos de evaluación científica derivados de Google Scholar, como son Google Scholar Metrics y Google Scholar Citations, y del índice h, el indicador bibliométrico adoptado como estándar por estos servicios. Asimismo se reseña la potencialidad de esta nueva base de datos como fuente para estudios en biomedicina y se realiza una comparación del índice h obtenido por las revistas e investigadores más relevantes en el ámbito de la medicina intensiva, a partir de los datos extraídos de Web of Science, Scopus y Google Scholar. Los resultados muestran que, pese a que los valores medios de índice h en Google Scholar son casi un 30% más elevados que los obtenidos en Web of Science y en torno a un 15% más altos que los recogidos por Scopus, no hay variaciones sustantivas en las clasificaciones generadas a partir de una u otra fuente de datos. Aunque existen algunos problemas técnicos, se concluye que Google Scholar es una herramienta válida para los investigadores en ciencias de la salud, tanto a efectos de recuperación de información como de cara a la extracción de indicadores bibliométricos (AU)

The aim of this study is to review the features, benefits and limitations of the new scientific evaluation products derived from Google Scholar, such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations, as well as the h-index, which is the standard bibliometric indicator adopted by these services. The study also outlines the potential of this new database as a source for studies in Biomedicine, and compares the h-index obtained by the most relevant journals and researchers in the field of intensive care medicine, based on data extracted from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Results show that although the average h-index values in Google Scholar are almost 30% higher than those obtained in Web of Science, and about 15% higher than those collected by Scopus, there are no substantial changes in the rankings generated from one data source or the other. Despite some technical problems, it is concluded that Google Scholar is a valid tool for researchers in Health Sciences, both for purposes of information retrieval and for the computation of bibliometric indicators (AU)

[Google Scholar and the h-index in biomedicine: the popularization of bibliometric assessment]. / Google Scholar e índice h en biomedicina: la popularización de la evaluación bibliométrica.

The aim of this study is to review the features, benefits and limitations of the new scientific evaluation products derived from Google Scholar, such as Google Scholar Metrics and Google Scholar Citations, as well as the h-index, which is the standard bibliometric indicator adopted by these services. The study also outlines the potential of this new database as a source for studies in Biomedicine, and compares the h-index obtained by the most relevant journals and researchers in the field of intensive care medicine, based on data extracted from the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Results show that although the average h-index values in Google Scholar are almost 30% higher than those obtained in Web of Science, and about 15% higher than those collected by Scopus, there are no substantial changes in the rankings generated from one data source or the other. Despite some technical problems, it is concluded that Google Scholar is a valid tool for researchers in Health Sciences, both for purposes of information retrieval and for the computation of bibliometric indicators.

[The Institute for Scientific Information journal selection criteria. Its application to Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología]. / Evaluación de Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología según criterios del "Institute for Scientific Information" para la selección de revistas científicas.

OBJECTIVE: Application of Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Journal Selection Criteria (JSC) to Archives of the Spanish Society of Ophthalmology. METHODOLOGY: Information about the journal, as well as instructions for authors, were sampled through 24 issues (2003-2004). ISI criteria were converted into quantitative indicators and applied to the journal in question and by extension to other Spanish medical journals. RESULTS: Compliance with international standards: Article titles (means of 7.3 keywords, 2 descriptors, 1.4 MeSH headings), author affiliation (included in 100% of cases, 21% error rate), bibliographic references (12% error rate in abbreviated journal titles), titles in English (8% translation error rate), abstracts (196 words average, 100% structured), keywords (4 words average, 1.2 coincidence with MeSH). External peer-review system is mentioned but no annual information is given on results. There was a 228-day delay on average between reception and acceptance and a 35-day delay between acceptance and publication. The journal covers 87% of ophthalmology research articles published in Spain. International scope: 57% of editorial board members publish in international journals of impact. National scope, but low presence (11%) of foreign authors. Citations to relevant international literature accredited by ISI journals are included. The journal appears in leading biomedical databases. Citations: 133 international citations between 1998 and 2005. Its impact factor potential (0.165) is superior to the last journals listed in the JCR under the heading of <>. Editorial board citations: 261 for the 2000-2004 period. CONCLUSIONS: Archives is an excellent means of communicating research results. It is the dominant dissemination channel for published and visible ophthalmology in Spain. Its international projection is good and the impact of its contents shows promising results.

Evaluación de Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología según criterios del «Institute for Scientific Information» para la selección de revistas científicas / The «Institute for Scientific Information» journal selection criteria. Its application to Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología

Objetivo: Aplicación de los criterios para la selecciónde revistas científicas del Institute for ScientificInformation (ISI) a Archivos de la SociedadEspañola de OftalmologíaMétodos: Muestra de 24 números (2003-2004), lainformación sobre la revista y sus instrucciones aautores. Se transforman los criterios del ISI en indicadorescuantitativos para su aplicación a la revistaestudiada y por extensión aplicable también a lasrevistas médicas españolasResultados: Cumplimiento estándares internacionales:Títulos artículos (media de 7,3 palabras claves,2 descriptores, 1,4 términos MeSH), filiaciónautores (se incluye en el 100% de los casos, tasa deerror del 21%), referencias bibliográficas (tasa deerror del 12% en títulos abreviados de revistas),títulos en inglés (tasa de error del 8% en traducción),abstract (media de 196 palabras, 100%estructurados), palabras claves (media de 4 palabras,1,2 coincidentes con MeSH). Se declara sistemade revisión externo por pares, pero no se dainformación anual sobre los resultados. Demora descontenentrerecepción-aceptación de artículos de 228 díasy entre aceptación-publicación de 35. Cobertura del87% de la oftalmología publicada en España. Internacionalidad:Equipo editorial publica el 57% desus trabajos en revistas internacionales de impacto.Cobertura nacional y escasa presencia de autoresextranjeros (11%). Cita la literatura internacionalrelevante y homologada con revistas ISI. Recogidaen las principales bases de datos biomédicas. Citación:133 citas internacionales entre 1998-2005. SuFI potencial (0,165) es superior al de las últimasrevistas de la categoría «Ophthalmology» del JCR.Citas equipo editorial: 261 para el período 2000-2004.Conclusiones: Archivos es un buen medio decomunicación de resultados de investigación. Es elcanal de difusión privilegiado de la oftalmologíapublicada y visible en España. Su proyección internacionales buena y la repercusión de los contenidosque publica muestra unos resultados optimistas

Objective: Application of Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Journal Selection Criteria (JSC) to Archives of the Spanish Society of Ophthalmology. Methodology: Information about the journal, as well as instructions for authors, were sampled through 24 issues (2003-2004). ISI criteria were converted into quantitative indicators and applied to the journal in question and by extension to other Spanish medical journals. Results: Compliance with international standards: Article titles (means of 7.3 keywords, 2 descriptors, 1.4 MeSH headings), author affiliation (included in 100% of cases, 21% error rate), bibliographic references (12% error rate in abbreviated journal titles), titles in English (8% translation error rate), abstracts (196 words average, 100% structured), keywords (4 words average, 1.2 coincidence with MeSH). External peer-review system is mentioned but no annual information is given on results. There was a 228-day delay on average between reception and acceptance and a 35-day delay between acceptance and publication. The journal covers 87% of ophthalmology research articles published in Spain. International scope: 57% of editorial board members publish in international journals of impact. National scope, but low presence (11%) of foreign authors. Citations to relevant international literature accredited by ISI journals are included. The journal appears in leading biomedical databases. Citations: 133 international citations between 1998 and 2005. Its impact factor potential (0.165) is superior to the last journals listed in the JCR under the heading of «Ophthalmology». Editorial board citations: 261 for the 2000-2004 period. Conclusions: Archives is an excellent means of communicating research results. It is the dominant dissemination channel for published and visible ophthalmology in Spain. Its international projection is good and the impact of its contents shows promising results

Spanish personal name variations in national and international biomedical databases: implications for information retrieval and bibliometric studies.

OBJECTIVES: The study sought to investigate how Spanish names are handled by national and international databases and to identify mistakes that can undermine the usefulness of these databases for locating and retrieving works by Spanish authors. METHODS: The authors sampled 172 articles published by authors from the University of Granada Medical School between 1987 and 1996 and analyzed the variations in how each of their names was indexed in Science Citation Index (SCI), MEDLINE, and Indice Medico Español (IME). The number and types of variants that appeared for each author's name were recorded and compared across databases to identify inconsistencies in indexing practices. We analyzed the relationship between variability (number of variants of an author's name) and productivity (number of items the name was associated with as an author), the consequences for retrieval of information, and the most frequent indexing structures used for Spanish names. RESULTS: The proportion of authors who appeared under more then one name was 48.1% in SCI, 50.7% in MEDLINE, and 69.0% in IME. Productivity correlated directly with variability: more than 50% of the authors listed on five to ten items appeared under more than one name in any given database, and close to 100% of the authors listed on more than ten items appeared under two or more variants. Productivity correlated inversely with retrievability: as the number of variants for a name increased, the number of items retrieved under each variant decreased. For the most highly productive authors, the number of items retrieved under each variant tended toward one. The most frequent indexing methods varied between databases. In MEDLINE and IME, names were indexed correctly as "first surname second surname, first name initial middle name initial" (if present) in 41.7% and 49.5% of the records, respectively. However, in SCI, the most frequent method was "first surname, first name initial second name initial" (48.0% of the records) and first surname and second surname run together, first name initial (18.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Retrievability on the basis of author's name was poor in all three databases. Each database uses accurate indexing methods, but these methods fail to result in consistency or coherence for specific entries. The likely causes of inconsistency are: (1) use by authors of variants of their names during their publication careers, (2) lack of authority control in all three databases, (3) the use of an inappropriate indexing method for Spanish names in SCI, (4) authors' inconsistent behaviors, and (5) possible editorial interventions by some journals. We offer some suggestions as to how to avert the proliferation of author name variants in the databases.

[Anales de Medicina Interna: standardization, dissemination and bibliometric indicators. (I) Standards evaluation]. / Anales de Medicina Interna: Normalización, difusión e indicadores bibliométricos. (I) Evaluación normativa.

The evaluation of scientific journal has become a necessary exercise for a variety of purposes and parties. We evaluated compliance with ISO standards for periodicals by the Spanish biomedical journal An. Med. Interna. Compliance with 136 data items based on different standards was evaluated with the help of a specially developed data sheet, and expressed as overall mean compliance (49.2%) and actual mean compliance (83.4%), i.e., compliance with those items considered necessary for the effective transfer of information via data bases. Items for which standardization was not optimal were examined in detail and specific recommendations for correction were given. We conclude that An. Med. Interna effectively fulfills its mission as an instrument for the communication of research results. In comparison with Spanish journals covering different areas and published by different organizations, compliance with international standards was better in An. Med. Interna.

[Anales de Medicina Interna: standardization, dissemination and bibliometric indicators. (II) Bibliometric analysis]. / Anales de Medicina Interna: Normalización, difusión e indicadores bibliométricos. (II) Análisis bibliométrico.

National and international diffusion, composition of the collective of authors who publish in the journal, and cocitation were studies for the journal An. Med. Interna. Diffusion was analyzed by examining the presence of the journal in medical data bases and specialized libraries in Spain. The institutional affiliations and geographical location of authors were determined on the basis of the affiliations given in the article by-lines. The journal is included in the major medical data bases and in approximately 80% of the libraries studied. The predominant professional affiliation among authors was clinical (hospital); the geographical origin of the authors (expressed as a percentage of all authors) approximately paralleled the volume of scientific publications generated by each of Spain's 17 autonomous regions. The cocitation study showed that An. Med. Interna ranked somewhere in the middle of the group' of 38 Spanish medical journals considered representative of research being done in Spain.

[Evaluation of the degree of compliance of Spanish scientific biomedical journals with international standards of presentation of periodicals]. / Evaluación del grado de ajuste de las revistas españolas de ciencias de la salud a las normas internacionales de presentación de publicaciones periódicas.

BACKGROUND: Because standardization is important to ensure the successful transfer of scientific information, compliance with international standards for the presentation of periodicals in 205 Spanish biomedical journals, with the aim of improving their quality as instruments of information transfer, is evaluated. METHODS: Journals were identified by consulting five printed bibliographies and four electronic databases. A total of 136 parameters of evaluation for the presentation of periodicals derived from ISO (International Standardization Organization) standards (86%) and recommendations published by UNESCO, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, The Council of Biology Editors, and EJ Huth (14%) were evaluated. Three features (inclusion, presentation and location) were recorded for most data item, and the total number of items studied was 342. RESULTS: The rate of compliance with standards in Spanish biomedical journals was 33.5% +/- 8.5 (DE). Compliance was highest for items related with the identification of the journal in the text pages and the issue contents list. The lowest rates of compliance were found for items related the volume and the abstract sheet. The worst standardized journals were those published by private firms and public administration organizations. As a group, journals published annually were the best standardized. CONCLUSIONS: The low rate of compliance with standards did not reflect inadequate compliance with all items, but was rather the result of complete noncompliance with particular standards, especially those relating to the abstract sheet, volume front cover, volume contents list and volume index. To improve compliance a change in the policies governing the availability of standards, the preparation of guides and manuals for scientific periodical publishing, and the development of training programs aimed at authors, editors, publishers, librarians and information scientists, is suggested.

[Incidence of the standardization of scientific journals in the transfer and evaluation of scientific information]. / Incidencia de la normalización de las revistas científicas en la transferencia y evaluación de la información científica.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: I analyze the repercussions of standardization of scientific publications in general, and of journals in particular, on the processes of scientific information transfer, diffusion and evaluation. DEVELOPMENT: Standardization facilitates the work of all agents in the primary (authors, publishers and readers) and secondary communication systems (librarians, information scientifics). Compliance with standards influences the presence of journal in bibliographic databases and de quality of bibliometric studies. Standardization thus has repercussions in the evaluation of science.