IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i1d10.1007_s11192-020-03725-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of bootstrapping method to compare research achievements for ophthalmology authors in the US since 2010

Author

Listed:
  • Shu-Chun Kuo

    (Chung Hwa University of Medical Technology, Jen-Teh
    Chi-Mei Medical Center)

  • Yu-Tsen Yeh

    (St. George’s, University of London)

  • Wei-Chih Kan

    (Chi-Mei Medical Center)

  • Tsair-Wei Chien

    (Chi-Mei Medical Center)

Abstract

The h-index has its popularity in the global scientific community. Despite the h-index being used as an indicator of individual research achievement, two main disadvantages have not been solved: (1) all coauthors contributing equally to article bylines and (2) the integer nature of the h-index making it hard to differentiate the IRAs among entities. This article aims to evaluate the most cited authors, institutes, and the US states in ophthalmology since 2010 using a proposed hx-index. Authors who worked for departments of ophthalmology in the United States were selected for identifying their IRAs in Pubmed Central (PMC) since 2010. Using the PubMed search engine, we conducted an observational study of citation analyses in affiliated research institutes and the US states for all authors who worked for departments of ophthalmology since 2010. A total of 18,289 published articles from 46,121 authors related to ophthalmology from the 50 states were analyzed. The bootstrapping method was applied with an estimated 95% confidence interval (CI) to distinguish the differences in IRAs among states and institutes. The x-index and the Kano model were complemental to the h-index for identifying the IRA characteristics and rankings. A pyramid plot was used to illustrate the importance of the author-weighted scheme (AWS) used for evaluating IRAs in academics. The hx-index combined both advantages of h-/x-indexes was proposed to assess IRAs for each facility. A significant difference was identified by observing two bands of estimated 95% CIs that were not overlapped. Furthermore, we drew a choropleth map on Google Maps to visualize the differences of IRA among states. There is a significant rise over time in the number of publications. The top-ranking states in hx-index based on publications and citations were Massachusetts (42.28), California (39.24), and Pennsylvania (34.29). If only the top 100 authors were included for calculating the median hx-index in each state, the top three were California (6.45), Massachusetts (3.97). and New York (3.07), with no significant difference found using the bootstrapping method. The institute and author with the highest hx-index were Harvard Medical School (Massachusetts) and Robert N Weinreb (California), respectively. We demonstrated that Dr. Medeiros from California published 466 articles in PMC and used the example to elucidate the importance of AWS when IRAs were assessed. With an overall increase in publications in the field of ophthalmology, IRAs assessed by these (1) hx-index, (2)the bootstrapping method, and (3) AWS should be synergically and complementarily combined together to evaluate author/institute IRA in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Shu-Chun Kuo & Yu-Tsen Yeh & Wei-Chih Kan & Tsair-Wei Chien, 2021. "The use of bootstrapping method to compare research achievements for ophthalmology authors in the US since 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 509-520, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03725-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03725-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03725-w
    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/s11192-020-03725-w?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. Chun-Ting Zhang, 2009. "The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-4, May.
    2. Trevor Fenner & Martyn Harris & Mark Levene & Judit Bar-Ilan, 2018. "A novel bibliometric index with a simple geometric interpretation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-14, July.
    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. Nadia Simoes & Nuno Crespo, 2020. "A flexible approach for measuring author-level publishing performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 331-355, January.
    2. Corey J A Bradshaw & Justin M Chalker & Stefani A Crabtree & Bart A Eijkelkamp & John A Long & Justine R Smith & Kate Trinajstic & Vera Weisbecker, 2021. "A fairer way to compare researchers at any career stage and in any discipline using open-access citation data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Shuangqing Sheng & Wei Song & Hua Lian & Lei Ning, 2022. "Review of Urban Land Management Based on Bibliometrics," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Shu-Chun Kuo & Tsair-Wei Chien & Willy Chou, 2022. "Suggestions to the article: medical professionalism research characteristics and hotspots," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 1191-1194, February.
    5. Zhenbin Yan & Qiang Wu & Xingchen Li, 2016. "Do Hirsch-type indices behave the same in assessing single publications? An empirical study of 29 bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1815-1833, December.
    6. Perc, Matjaž, 2010. "Zipf’s law and log-normal distributions in measures of scientific output across fields and institutions: 40 years of Slovenia’s research as an example," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 358-364.
    7. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    8. Lathabai, Hiran H., 2020. "ψ-index: A new overall productivity index for actors of science and technology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    9. Parul Khurana & Kiran Sharma, 2022. "Impact of h-index on author’s rankings: an improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4483-4498, August.
    10. Wildgaard, Lorna, 2016. "A critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author-level performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1055-1078.
    11. Stefano Vannucci, 2010. "Dominance dimension: a common parametric formulation for integer-valued scientific impact indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 43-48, July.
    12. Yu Liu & Wei Zuo & Ying Gao & Yanhong Qiao, 2013. "Comprehensive geometrical interpretation of h-type indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 605-615, August.
    13. Brady Lund, 2019. "Examination of correlates of H-index as a measure of research productivity for library and information science faculty in the United States and Canada," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 897-915, August.
    14. Roberto Todeschini, 2011. "The j-index: a new bibliometric index and multivariate comparisons between other common indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 621-639, June.
    15. Kuan, Chung-Huei & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2011. "Ranking patent assignee performance by h-index and shape descriptors," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 303-312.
    16. Nader Ebrahim & Hadi Salehi & Mohamed Embi & Mahmoud Danaee & Marjan Mohammadjafari & Azam Zavvari & Masoud Shakiba & Masoomeh Shahbazi-Moghadam, 2014. "Equality of Google Scholar with Web of Science Citations: Case of Malaysian Engineering Highly Cited Papers," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(5), pages 1-63, October.
    17. Josep Freixas & Roger Hoerl & William S. Zwicker, 2023. "Nash's bargaining problem and the scale-invariant Hirsch citation index," Papers 2309.01192, arXiv.org.
    18. Giovanni Anania & Annarosa Caruso, 2013. "Two simple new bibliometric indexes to better evaluate research in disciplines where publications typically receive less citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 617-631, August.
    19. Prem Kumar Singh, 2022. "t-index: entropy based random document and citation analysis using average h-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 637-660, January.
    20. Chen, Meiqian & Guo, Zhaoxia & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique, 2021. "Citations optimal growth path: A tool to analyze sensitivity to citations of h-like indexes," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).

    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:126:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03725-w. 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.