IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v121y2019i1d10.1007_s11192-019-03188-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New quality and quantity indices in science (NewQIS): results of the first decade—project progress review

Author

Listed:
  • David A. Groneberg

    (Goethe University Frankfurt)

  • Doris Klingelhöfer

    (Goethe University Frankfurt)

  • Dörthe Brüggmann

    (Goethe University Frankfurt)

  • Cristian Scutaru

    (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Free University and Humboldt University)

  • Axel Fischer

    (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Free University and Humboldt University)

  • David Quarcoo

    (Goethe University Frankfurt)

Abstract

Strategies employing information science and scientometric approaches were introduced to science policy and management over the past decades. As a rapidly evolving field, new bibliometric parameters are proposed and discussed continuously and the fields also benefits from the introduction of novel visualization techniques. The present article summarizes the experiences with a platform that combines geographical mapping with scientometrics. It was established between 2005 and 2008 at the Charité in Berlin and termed “New Quality and Quantity Indices in Science” (NewQIS), consisting of the integration of common scientometric parameters such as the h-index and novel visualization techniques including density equalizing mapping. NewQIS was used to assess socio-economic important fields of medicine and sciences. Within NewQIS studies, research activities, citation patterns and their relation to socio-economic figures were analyzed with regard to time periods, countries, continents or even single cities. Within the decade after its establishment, more than 80 NewQIS articles were peer-reviewed and published. Being a non-funded low budget project, it was used by many medical students to conduct their MD thesis. The narrow technical frame led to the chance of a comparison of research output between different fields of science. This article summarizes NewQIS 1.0 activities, discusses its limits and gives a look into the future of NewQIS 2.0 with a target of 200 evaluated entities of the biomedical field of sciences.

Suggested Citation

  • David A. Groneberg & Doris Klingelhöfer & Dörthe Brüggmann & Cristian Scutaru & Axel Fischer & David Quarcoo, 2019. "New quality and quantity indices in science (NewQIS): results of the first decade—project progress review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 451-478, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:121:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03188-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-019-03188-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-019-03188-8
    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/s11192-019-03188-8?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. Lucio Bertoli-Barsotti & Tommaso Lando, 2017. "The h-index as an almost-exact function of some basic statistics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1209-1228, November.
    2. Doris Klingelhöfer & David A. Groneberg & Markus Braun & Dörthe Brüggmann & Jenny Jaque, 2018. "Fifteen years after September 11: Where is the medical research heading? A scientometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 45-60, October.
    3. Lutz Bornmann & Loet Leydesdorff, 2018. "Count highly-cited papers instead of papers with h citations: use normalized citation counts and compare “like with like”!," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 1119-1123, May.
    4. David A Groneberg, 2018. "Social sciences research in the Central European city of Wrocław: A density-equalizing mapping analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Lucio Bertoli-Barsotti & Tommaso Lando, 2017. "A theoretical model of the relationship between the h-index and other simple citation indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1415-1448, June.
    6. David A. Groneberg & Axel Fischer & Doris Klingelhöfer & Michael H. K. Bendels & David Quarcoo & Dörthe Brüggmann, 2018. "The story behind Oncotarget? A bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2195-2205, December.
    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. Mingyang Wang & Shijia Jiao & Kah-Hin Chai & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Building journal’s long-term impact: using indicators detected from the sustained active articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 261-283, October.
    2. Biró, Tamás S. & Telcs, András & Józsa, Máté & Néda, Zoltán, 2023. "Gintropic scaling of scientometric indexes," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 618(C).
    3. Bertoli-Barsotti, Lucio & Lando, Tommaso, 2019. "How mean rank and mean size may determine the generalised Lorenz curve: With application to citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 387-396.
    4. Gangan Prathap, 2018. "Letter to the editor: Dimensionless citation indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1433-1435, June.
    5. Brito, Ricardo & Navarro, Alonso Rodríguez, 2021. "The inconsistency of h-index: A mathematical analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    6. Marek Gagolewski & Barbara Żogała-Siudem & Grzegorz Siudem & Anna Cena, 2022. "Ockham’s index of citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2829-2845, May.
    7. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Balázs Győrffy & Andrea Magda Nagy & Péter Herman & Ádám Török, 2018. "Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: an evaluation of the first 117 research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 409-426, October.
    10. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2021. "The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3667-3672, April.
    11. Gerson Pech & Catarina Delgado, 2020. "Percentile and stochastic-based approach to the comparison of the number of citations of articles indexed in different bibliographic databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 223-252, April.
    12. Wei, Shelia X. & Tong, Tong & Rousseau, Ronald & Wang, Wanru & Ye, Fred Y., 2022. "Relations among the h-, g-, ψ-, and p-index and offset-ability," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    13. Guangyuan Hu & Lei Wang & Rong Ni & Weishu Liu, 2020. "Which h-index? An exploration within the Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1225-1233, June.
    14. Lucio Bertoli-Barsotti, 2017. "Reply to the comments of Prathap," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 1137-1140, August.
    15. Fassin, Yves, 2024. "The internal dynamics of journals’ h-cores over time," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    16. Antonoyiannakis, Manolis, 2018. "Impact Factors and the Central Limit Theorem: Why citation averages are scale dependent," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1072-1088.
    17. Gangan Prathap, 2017. "Letter to the editor: comments on the paper of Lucio Bertoli-Barsotti and Tommaso Lando: a theoretical model of the relationship between the h-index and other simple citation indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 1133-1136, August.
    18. Gangan Prathap, 2021. "Letter to the editor: Is the h-index a mock compromise between the p-index and the z-index?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4537-4539, May.
    19. Alberto Martín-Martín & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2018. "Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2175-2188, September.
    20. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Judit Dobránszki, 2018. "Rejoinder to “Multiple versions of the h-index: cautionary use for formal academic purposes”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 1131-1137, May.

    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:121:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03188-8. 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.