IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v117y2018i3d10.1007_s11192-018-2930-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of medical research performance by thermodynamic and citation analysis methods

Author

Listed:
  • Rogheyeh Eskrootchi

    (Iran University of Medical Sciences)

  • Nadia Sanee

    (Iran University of Medical Sciences)

Abstract

Beside citation metrics, in recent years, the thermodynamic indicators have been introduced. So, we want to compare citation metrics like h-index to thermodynamic indicators such as the exergy for determining the best indicator to rank the scientific agents effectively. This study is the bibliometric research and analyzes the scientific performance of the best countries, institutions, and universities in medical fields based on the citation metrics and the thermodynamic indicators upon extracted data from Scopus and Scimago databases. The Excel software version 2016 was used for analyzing the research performance of these medical agents and descriptive statistics were reported. Among countries, the United States had the best research performance based on the highest number of P, C, h, X. But, it had the lower impact than some countries like the United Kingdom and Italy. Iran is ranked 17th among the countries of the world in terms of studying indicators. About the world medical institutions, the National Institutes of Health Bethesda had the best research performance based on h and X, but the most qualitative institution was the American Cancer Society. Iranian medical universities compared to their world peers had the lower P, C, i, h, X. But Tehran University of Medical Sciences ranked first upon h and X. Mashhad University of Medical Sciences had the best quality of the scientific publication. Results showed that the exergy as the thermodynamic indicator and research performance metric can rank better the academic units based on the total number of papers and citations than the citation metrics such as h-index.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogheyeh Eskrootchi & Nadia Sanee, 2018. "Comparison of medical research performance by thermodynamic and citation analysis methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2159-2168, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2930-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2930-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-018-2930-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-018-2930-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gangan Prathap, 2011. "The Energy–Exergy–Entropy (or EEE) sequences in bibliometric assessment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 515-524, June.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2014. "The zynergy-index and the formula for the h-index," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(2), pages 426-427, February.
    3. P. Nishy & Yatish Panwar & Suresh Prasad & G. K. Mandal & Gangan Prathap, 2012. "An impact-citations-exergy (iCX) trajectory analysis of leading research institutions in India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 245-251, April.
    4. Mike Thelwall & Paul Wilson, 2016. "Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(8), pages 1962-1972, August.
    5. Ying Ding & Guo Zhang & Tamy Chambers & Min Song & Xiaolong Wang & Chengxiang Zhai, 2014. "Content-based citation analysis: The next generation of citation analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(9), pages 1820-1833, September.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff, 2013. "An evaluation of impacts in “Nanoscience & nanotechnology”: steps towards standards for citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 35-55, January.
    7. Gangan Prathap, 2017. "A three-dimensional bibliometric evaluation of recent research in India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1085-1097, March.
    8. Gangan Prathap, 2014. "Quantity, quality, and consistency as bibliometric indicators," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(1), pages 214-214, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2023. "Letter to the editor: Measure measure on the wall who is the fairest of them all?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 871-872, January.
    3. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann, 2022. "Use of bibliometrics for research evaluation in emerging markets economies: a review and discussion of bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5879-5930, October.
    4. Gangan Prathap & Ronald Rousseau, 2023. "The modified repeat rate described within a thermodynamic framework," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 3185-3195, May.
    5. Gangan Prathap, 2013. "Second order indicators for evaluating international scientific collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 563-570, May.
    6. Gangan Prathap, 2019. "Balance: a thermodynamic perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 247-255, April.
    7. Gangan Prathap, 2017. "Scientific wealth and inequality within nations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 923-928, November.
    8. Gangan Prathap, 2017. "A three-dimensional bibliometric evaluation of recent research in India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1085-1097, March.
    9. Marek Gagolewski & Barbara Żogała-Siudem & Grzegorz Siudem & Anna Cena, 2022. "Fairness in the three-dimensional model for citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 6055-6059, October.
    10. Metwaly Ali Mohamed Eldakar, 2019. "Who reads international Egyptian academic articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley readership categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 105-135, October.
    11. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    12. Pan, Xuelian & Yan, Erjia & Cui, Ming & Hua, Weina, 2018. "Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: A comparative study of three tools," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 481-493.
    13. Mike Thelwall, 2020. "Data in Brief: Can a mega-journal for data be useful?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 697-709, July.
    14. Paul Kudlow & Devin Bissky Dziadyk & Alan Rutledge & Aviv Shachak & Gunther Eysenbach, 2020. "The citation advantage of promoted articles in a cross‐publisher distribution platform: A 12‐month randomized controlled trial," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(10), pages 1257-1274, October.
    15. Mingyang Wang & Zhenyu Wang & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Which can better predict the future success of articles? Bibliometric indices or alternative metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1575-1595, June.
    16. Mingyang Wang & Jiaqi Zhang & Shijia Jiao & Xiangrong Zhang & Na Zhu & Guangsheng Chen, 2020. "Important citation identification by exploiting the syntactic and contextual information of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2109-2129, December.
    17. Kim, Ha Jin & Jeong, Yoo Kyung & Song, Min, 2016. "Content- and proximity-based author co-citation analysis using citation sentences," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 954-966.
    18. Mike Thelwall, 2018. "Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation counts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1231-1240, June.
    19. Mike Thelwall, 2017. "Are Mendeley reader counts useful impact indicators in all fields?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1721-1731, December.
    20. Luca Cagliero & Paolo Garza & Mohammad Reza Kavoosifar & Elena Baralis, 2018. "Discovering cross-topic collaborations among researchers by exploiting weighted association rules," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1273-1301, August.

    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:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2930-4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.