Nsenga Kumwimba Mathieu PhD Key Laboratory of Mountain Surface Processes and Ecological Regulation Associate Professor Beijing, Beijing, China
2 days ago
I think, h index is not an appropriate index to assess a researcher. For instance, a paper could be regularly cited because other researchers are refuting its results. Generally, big research groups in some fields can generate many original research articles, each article with dozens or hundreds of authors. People of these research groups would often display extremely high impact metrics that could not truthfully reveal their individual prominence within the area.
The H Index is the best way of assessing the researcher as in cases where the researcher is just described orally or by paper without seing exactly what was done it becomes bias.
2 days ago
Dr. Habibollah Turki PhD Infectious & Tropical Diseases Research Center , Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran Assistant Professor bandar abbas, Hormozgan, Iran
4 days ago
The h index is important, but not enough to fully assess the researcher. In addition, the indicators that indicate the academic rank and the duration of the research activity should be considered in the researcher's assessment.
I think it does as the evidence in different fields is showing that, The following articles are some examples:
Bertoli-Barsotti L, Lando T. The h-index as an almost-exact function of some
basic statistics. Scientometrics. 2017;113(2):1209-1228. doi:
10.1007/s11192-017-2508-6. Epub 2017 Sep 9. PubMed PMID: 29081557; PubMed Central
Bunting AC, Alavifard S, Walker B, Miller DR, Ramsay T, Boet S. Research
Productivity and Rankings of Anesthesiology Departments in Canada and the United
States: The Relationship Between the h-Index and Other Common Metrics
[RETRACTED]. Anesth Analg. 2018 Mar 5. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002508. [Epub
ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 28961558.
Hunt GE, Cleary M, Walter G. Psychiatry and the Hirsch h-index: The
relationship between journal impact factors and accrued citations. Harv Rev
Psychiatry. 2010 Jul-Aug;18(4):207-19. doi: 10.3109/10673229.2010.493742. Review.
PubMed PMID: 20597591.
YES, you're right, this point is important for many researchers particularly who are at the beginning of their research career. I think a researcher who has high a H index we can consider their works and we can count on his school
but not all H indexes are real because some companies count H index through many fake journals so we must be ensure the source of H index before considering it
Recommended 1 time
Dr. jalal azadmanjiri PhD Monash University PhD in Materials Science and Engineering Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
In my opinion, h-index is the main parameter that could evaluate the quality of a researcher. Because it is directly related to the research publications and some other outcomes of a researcher.
I agree .There could be another index reflecting only citiation for corresponding author. ?f you are not corresponding author or first name in the publication or senior (last name in the pub) it should be eliminated from the list.
Personally, I would prefer an index in which papers are weighted to account for the impact factor of the journal, number of co-authors and position in the authors' list. For instance, a 2017 paper in a journal with the impact factor "IF", and "n" authors should count as "IF/n" multiplied by 3 for the first author, by 2 for the last author and by 1 for each other author. If the first or last position is shared by two or more authors, than the 3 or 2 points should be divided accordingly. For journals with no impact factor, one can consider a flat IF = 0.1. Thus, all your papers will be included, the audience of the journal considered and your direct contribution to that paper acknowledged. It will limit the courtesy authorship offered to "important" people or addition of lab students and other members with no contribution just because the PI needs to show what a good supervisor s/he is.
I don't think its a good measure of a researcher. There's a bias toward big studies that get cited numerous times..for example if you are a scientist working in an institute that is a contributor to large scale sequencing projects, you will be one of the usually dozens of authors on the paper, and you will likely get cited thousands of times. But your contirbution to the overall project may be less than another researcher who is one of a small team that did a much bigger segment of work on a smaller project, albeit published in a lower impact factor journal and not cited as much.
But it's better than just looking at impact factor of the journals so there is some benefit to it. I think the above problem should be sorted out though.
Recommended 1 time
Dr. Robert Rahimi MD, MSCR Baylor University Medical Center Assistant Professor Dallas, Texas, United States
4 days ago
The h-index is important as it demonstrates the quality and not quantity of the researcher (3 big studies in nature or science or NEJM would likely yield a higher h index rather than 25 studies in lower impact journals) however h index increases with more time if continued research is done (i.e. a professor should have a higher score vs an assistant professor)
Recommended 1 time
Anthony Cemaluk C Egbuonu Ph.D Department of Biochemistry, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike Professor (Associate) Umudike, Abia/SouthEast, Nigeria
Not entirely, reflective of the quality of researchers or appropriate index for evaluating a researcher. Rate of citation is not quality indicator. Besides, h-index could be influenced by self-citation.
Dr Olga Ellina MD PhD National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Greece
PERHAPS,the h-index might not represent the quality of researchers. MAYBE THERE SHOYLD BE OTHER PARAMETERS THAT CAN EVALUATE THE RESEATCHERS, TILL THEN WE HAVE THIS INDEX.
Normalement, oui. cependant, la vrai valeur d'un charcheur est la qualité de ses recherches et son niveau intellectuelle; il se peut que quelqu'un est un très bon chercheur néanmoins, le manque de moyens le déclasse.
There could be another index reflecting only citiation for corresponding author. If you are not corresponding author or first name in the publication or senior (last name in the pub) it should be eliminated from the list.
Dr. Zhigang Cheng MD, PhD Xiangya Hosptial, Central South University Changsha, Hunan, China
H index is a parameter that could evaluate the quality of a researcher, but it is not the only measurement the only criteria to evaluate the quality of researcher.
Dr. Sriram Seshadri PhD Institute of Science, Nirma University Academic Coordinator Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
H index is a good parameter to evaluate the quality of a researcher. However, the index also depends upon the citation for each paper. There are many excellent papers with no citation. Hence, it cannon be the only criteria to evaluate the quality of researcher.
Dr Ibrahim Alghoraibi PhD Physics Department/ Damascus University Assistant Professor damascus, damascus, Syia
I think H index, reflecting the academic and scientific quality of the researcher and his production capacity. H index is the result of the balance between the number of publications and the number of citations.
Dr. Chunming Cheng PhD The Ohio State University Senior Research Associate Columbus, OH, United States
2 days ago
Before we discuss the appropriate index to evaluate a researcher, we need make a conclusion what kinds of researcher is good ones. Good publications? good application of their research? or a lots honors from them? Actually, all information are used to evaluate a research.
Unfortunately it is not accurate especially for researchers publishing plenty of papers. I think that a special score should be done taking into account both the quality of work and the reputation (including impact factor) of the journal.
Dr. Tapas Kumar Sar PhD West Bengal University of Animal and Fishery Sciences Assistant Professor Kolkata, West Bengal, India
2 days ago
H- index is a good measurment of research performance, but it is not the only measurement because the application part of the research works may not be evaluated by H-index only.
As far as I'm concerned, h index is not an appropriate index to assess a researcher. For instance, a paper could be regularly cited because other researchers are refuting its results. Generally, big research groups in some fields can generate many original research articles, each article with dozens or hundreds of authors. People of these research groups would often display extremely high impact metrics that could not truthfully reveal their individual prominence within the area.
The h-index is a good index, but in many fields it is not appropeiate. In biomedical fields the number of articles as first, last and/or corresponding authors may be a bettere index of quality of researchers.
Dr. Sepideh Khodaverdi MD Iran University of Medical Sciences Proffesor(assistant) Tehran, Iran (Islamic Republic of)
4 days ago
In my opinion, H- index can be one of the tools for measuring the quality of researchers, but it's not enough alone. It is also important whether researches that have been done by a researcher are on a continuum or not.
What are PubFacts Points?
PubFacts points are rewards to PubFacts members, which allow you to better promote your profile and articles throughout PubFacts.com
How do I earn PubFacts Points?
Each member is given 50 PubFacts points upon signing up. You can earn additional points by completing 100% of your profile, creating and participating in discussions, and sharing other members research.
What can I do with PubFacts Points?
Currently, you can use PubFacts Points to promote and increase readership of your articles.