IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dbk/medicw/v3y2024ip395id395.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tools and methodologies for scientific evaluation: bibliometrics, scientometrics and informatics

Author

Listed:
  • José Humberto Puente
  • Elisabeth Viviana Lucero-Baldevenites
  • Lee Yang Díaz-Chieng
  • Juan Manuel Quintero Ramírez
  • Daniel Roman-Acosta

Abstract

This study analyzed the main tools and methodologies used in bibliometrics, scientometrics, informatics and altmetrics, through a descriptive analytical review of secondary sources published between 2019-2024. The research identified and evaluated the most used tools, including VOSviewer (75% usage in network analysis), CiteSpace (60% in trend identification), and Altmetric.com (80% in alternative metrics). The results revealed that fundamental mathematical models such as Lotka's law (70% application), Zipf's law (55%) and Bradford's law (50%) continue to be essential pillars for the quantitative analysis of scientific production. Altmetrics were found to be gaining significant relevance, with Plum Analytics used in 65% of applications to assess the social impact of research. The study concluded that the integration of traditional and emerging tools allows for a more complete and multidimensional evaluation of scientific activity, although there are limitations in the accessibility and complexity of implementation of some tools.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:dbk:medicw:v:3:y:2024:i::p:395:id:395
DOI: 10.56294/mw2024395
as

Download full text from publisher

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
for a similarly titled item that would be available.

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dbk:medicw:v:3:y:2024:i::p:395:id:395. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Javier Gonzalez-Argote (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://mw.ageditor.ar/ .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.