Dear Hassan Nima

I appreciate the link where you get a synthetic but very informative publication of the quality of the research publications based on the value of the Impact Factor. Highly recommended

regards

Jose Luis

In order to animate the discussion, I commented the following.

The quality of medical publications evaluated through impact indicator is a method and current procedure accepted by many biomedical journals, given the relative ease to quantify and to apply it in order to assess the merit of the publication and scientific productivity researchers.

Being such an important issue, it is noteworthy that the International Committee of Editors Biomedical Journal (Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and preparing the publication of a biomedical publication) develops soon and as not as explicit theme quality of publications, mainly in Section I Purpose: How to use these recommendations; that the text says:

• The authors verify that it is useful to follow the recommendations in this document whenever possible because follow improves the quality and clarity of the text of manuscripts submitted to any journal, and in turn facilitates the editing process

Also tangentially it touches the issue of quality in Section II.A.1. authors

• Although obviously these policies on the degree of contribution and the identification of the responsible eliminate much of the ambiguity regarding contributions, do not resolve the question of the quantity and quality of contribution required for it to qualify as authorship

In brief but is more explicitly notes the participation with experts in the quality of published medical writing, in section II.C. Peer review

• Therefore, peer assessment can be considered an important of the scientific process. Although its value has been little studied and widely discussion, peer review helps editors decide which manuscripts are suitable for their journals, while authors and publishers help in their efforts to improve the quality of the articles

Finally I believe that the entire document if it provides the necessary elements to make its recommendations following a quality article that can be published in any prestigious journal, regardless of language and the use of the impact factor is obtained.

Only some additional arguments to encourage discussion of those who follow the approach of this issue

regards

Dr. Jose Luis Garcia Vigil

PS: Annex league publication cited

 Dear Aleksey V. Belikov

I agree with your proposal. Indeed the index "h" does not eliminate the bias in the individual evaluation of researchers, as it also feeds on the number of citations they get when they publish their work in journals that previously already have a high FI and therefore, are also the most read by a history of quality that have been given other researchers and potential readers.

Then I copy of its publication a summary of his proposal:

• "Her I propose to normalize citations to an article by the median number of citations to articles published in the same journal in the same year (i. e. , normalize by the Median Neighbors’ Citedness, MNC), thus obtaining the Neighbor Article Score".

He also commented that another way to assess more fully the publication of an author in some Journal, is the identification of readership of its publication, the reader category; for example in the case of publications in the Medical Journal of IMSS (doctors, nurses, residents, students, paramedics) and how many of these publications or proposals have been practicing medicine institution (IMSS) and country ( Mexico), data which could calculate the True Impact or Real Impact Factor.

Greetings and thanks for your contribution

Similarly speech, I propose another publication where Leslie Citrome describes how not to favor both the impact factor currently used to assess the quality of Journals and Publications (Indirectly it is also useful to authors and researchers to better position the guild and get economic promotion or kind to the development of their projects). A letter I describe what I said of his work entitled "IMPACT FACTOR? SHMIMPACT FACTOR!"

• "I like your work, I have read with interest and agree that the Impact Factor as has been managing to qualify the quality of publications and Journals, has a difficult bias to eliminate but is that changing the way identify, read and evaluate such work and Journals".
• "I think the timely publication, efficient and rapid assessment of editorial experts to assess the publication of work (pairs), updating the peer group, the interaction of critical readers with the authors of the work, and ability to influence them to give more life to the content, make more dynamic assimilation of original knowledge published by a (authors) and assimilated by others (readers and authors in power) to support their own work, is what really you confer quality to those contributions".

Thank you

Dr. Jose Luis Garcia Vigil

Hello everyone

The Impact Factor may have little value when it comes to seemingly prestigious publications for having a very strict Editorial Board of experts (peers) in the application of their quality criteria; By posting articles where there is conflict of interest, cronyism or nepotism, not declared by any author (s), or when many of them did not contribute in a relevant way in the form and content of the publication.

This happens in publications of clinical cases with Pluriautoría, as discussed in the following publication:

Https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280927022

Contrary and valid situation, when in a large research project, more than 7 authors, coming from similar or greater number of countries and research centers, that together, develop a collaborative work, as in the following work:

Population genetic differentiation of body mass index across Europe

Nature Genetics. Published online 14 September 2015; Doi: 101038 / ng.3401.

(43 autors)

regards

Dr. José Luis García Vigil

Hola a todos

El Factor de Impacto puede tener poco valor cuando se trata de publicaciones aparentemente de prestigio por tener un Consejo Editorial de expertos (pares) muy estrictos en la aplicación de sus criterios de calidad; a al publicar artículos donde hay conflicto de interés, amiguismo o nepotismo, no declarado por alguno(s) de (los) autor(es), o cuando muchos de ellos no contribuyeron en forma relevante en la forma y contenido de la publicación. 

Esto sucede en publicaciones de casos clínicos con Pluriautoría, como se comenta en la siguiente publicación:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280927022

Situación contraria y válida, cuando en un proyecto de investigación de gran envergadura, participan más de 7 autores, provenientes de similar o mayor número de países y centros de investigación, que en conjunto, desarrollan un trabajo colaborativo, como sucede en el siguiente trabajo:

Population genetic differentiation of height and body mass index across Europe

Nature Genetics. published online 14 September 2015; doi:10.1038/ng.3401.

(43 autors)

Saludos

Dr. José Luis García Vigil

Article Multiauthorship and False Authorship: Why Worrying About This?

The Impact Factor may have little value when it comes to seemingly prestigious publications for having a very strict Editorial Board of experts (peers) in the application of their quality criteria; By posting articles where there is conflict of interest, cronyism or nepotism, not declared by any author (s), or when many of them did not contribute in a relevant way in the form and content of the publication.

Dear Goli Srinivasarao

From what I see, you agree with what is described above by whoever writes it; In the sense that the Impact Factor has little or no usefulness to evaluate the quality of the publications when the members of the Editorial Board of a Magazine have lax or poor quality criteria.

Thank you very much for participating in this discussion.

regards

Jose Luis

Estimado Goli Srinivasarao

Por lo que veo, usted está de acuerdo con lo descrito anteriormente por quien esto escribe; en el sentido de que el Factor de Impacto tiene poca o nula utilidad para evaluar calidad de las publicaciones cuando los integrantes del Consejo Editorial de una Revista, tienen criterios laxos o poco estrictos en calidad.

Muchas gracias por participar en esta discusión.

Saludos

José Luis

Hello everyone

I return again to this network of discussion and argumentation as to whether the Impact Factor is a good Indicator to qualify the quality of a biomedical publication?

At the moment, it is the indicator that is still used more for that purpose, until a better indicator is found.

In previous contributions, mine and other researchers, alternatives have been proposed to improve the way the quality of publications is rated.

In this network (RG) I found a publication by Kjetil K. Haugen, where he compares the procedure for rating the quality of publications, number of readers of publications and review of the profile of the researcher, as well as readers who read only the abstract or article Complete (I assume) for having downloaded the full version in pdf).

This publication, whose link at the end of the commentary will find it, when comparing RG with another network of scientific publications (Academia.edu), found inconsistencies in RG score, although the page is more interactive and short term (very fast ), Whereas Academia.edu, was less interactive and with less statistical information of the investigations by each investigator; Although apparently, puts more attention to the content and quality of the publication.

regards

Jose Luis

Hola a todos

Regreso nuevamente a esta red de discusión y argumentación respecto de si el ¿Factor de Impacto es un buen Indicador para calificar la calidad de una publicación biomédica?

De momento, es el indicador que actualmente se sigue utilizando más para dicho fin, mientras no se encuentre un mejor indicador. 

En aportaciones anteriores, mías y de otros investigadores, se han propuesto alternativas para mejorar la forma como se califica la calidad de las publicaciones.

En esta red (RG) encontré una publicación de Kjetil K. Haugen, donde compara el procedimiento para calificar la calidad de las publicaciones, número de lectores de publicaciones y revisión del perfil del investigador, además de lectores que leyeron solamente el resumen o el artículo completo (supongo) por haber descargado la versión completa en pdf).

Esta publicación, cuyo vínculo al final del comentario lo encontrarán, al hacer la comparación de RG con otra red de publicaciones científicas (Academia.edu), encontró inconsistencias en la puntuación de RG, aunque la página es más interactiva y a corto plazo (muy rápida), mientras que Academia.edu, fue menos interactiva y con menor información estadística de las investigaciones por cada investigador; aunque aparentemente, pone mayor atención al contenido y calidad de la publicación.

Saludos

José Luis

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283012846_ResearchGatenet_is_a_silly_competitor_to_academiaedu

Research ResearchGate.net is a silly competitor to academia.edu

Hello everyone

After a brief one-year break, I return to the discussion of the importance of continuing to use the Impact Factor (IF) to evaluate the quality of research papers published in Scientific Journals considered prestigious and that have an editorial committee of expert reviewers (pairs).

I have the pleasure of commenting synthetically on the content of a publication by Werner Marx and Lutz Bornmann; same as I could read in full text and that abounds in detail in the background of the IF, which was initially designed and adopted by librarians as a bibliometric evaluation tool.

That is, the main objective was to evaluate the quality of a Scientific Journal as a whole, not to evaluate a particular document or article, let alone evaluate the quality of the scientific production of a specific researcher or a group of scientists. researchers

regards

Jose Luis

Hola a todos

Después de una breve pausa de un año, regreso a la discusión de la importancia de seguir utilizando el Factor de Impacto (FI) para evaluar la calidad de los trabajos de investigación publicados en las Revistas Científicas consideradas de prestigio y que tienen un comité editorial de revisores expertos (pares).

Tengo el gusto de comentar en forma sintética el contenido de una publicación de Werner Marx y Lutz Bornmann; mismo que hasta ahora pude leer en texto completo y que abunda con detalle en el antecedente del FI, el cual inicialmente fue diseñado y adoptado por los bibliotecarios como una herramienta de evaluación bibliométrica.

Esto es, que el objetivo principal era la de evaluar la calidad de una Revista Científica como un todo, no para evaluar un documento o artículo particular, y mucho menos, evaluar la calidad de la producción científica de un investigador específico ni de un grupo de investigadores.

Saludos

José Luis

Article The journal Impact Factor and alternative metrics: A variety...

Hello everyone

I go back to this discussion network about the Impact Factor, where the main question is whether it is the best indicator to evaluate the quality of biomedical publications.

Recently a very important editorial has been published in this regard, by researchers: Carlos Eduardo Maldonado and Andrés M. Pérez-Acosta, with critical information about the indexes used to assess scientific productivity, especially considering the H index, which is the one it is used in RG.

In summary and subject to you draw their own conclusions, I commented at the time, which is one of the best indices, the "most inclusive and democratic" to consider publications and citations of them, both basic scientific research, as applied ; social and humanistic

regards Jose Luis

Article EDITORIAL Una reflexión crítica sobre la cultura de rankings...

this link is useful

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3134010/

regards

Dear Hassan Nima

I appreciate the link where you get a synthetic but very informative publication of the quality of the research publications based on the value of the Impact Factor. Highly recommended

regards

Jose Luis

It is not the best, but it certainly is one the most crucial indicators.

In academic and research circles, there is a lot of debate about the issue of the impact factor for the journals and the scientific periodicals. It is held as a unique chapter in determining the level of these magazines and periodicals to those who are skeptical or indifferent to it for various reasons. Before going into the subject, it is good to see the definition of this modulus of influence, according to Thomson Reuters, the accredited academic body worldwide. According to the site, this factor is calculated for the magazine or journal by dividing the number of total quotations obtained by the magazine on the number of articles or research published in the same magazine in a certain period of time.

Dear Reza Biria. Is right

Dear Djaafar Zemali. Agree. The Impact Factor is calculated in each Journal, but it can also be calculated as an average of all the magazines of a publisher, a country or a region of the world.