Health Management & Information Science

Health Management & Information Science

Introduce a novel index for scientific outputs ranking by the addressing self-citation

Document Type : Short Communication

Authors
Ali Reza Soltanian 1
Roya Ahmaddoost Razdari 2
1 Department of Biostatistics, Modeling of Noncommunicable Diseases Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
2 Department of Biostatistics, Student Research Committee, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
10.30476/jhmi.2025.102014.1212
Abstract
Introduction: The Hirsch index is not comprehensive for scientific outputs ranking. Its structure does not include some issues such as self-citation. Self-citation perhaps creates a scientometric complication. Using some scientometric indices such as h-index is inadequate for ranking scientists alone, and they perhaps turn to fake self-citations to increase their h-index over time. A new index (Ah-index) based on self-citation was introduced to scientific outputs ranking in this study.
Methods: The information system integration division (ISID) of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences was used to calculate the Ah-index on August 5, 2023 (n=445). Bootstrapping technique was used to estimate uncertainty, standard error and 95% confidence interval of Pearson’s correlation coefficient between the new index and h-index.
Results: This study shows that the correlation coefficient between h-index and Ah-index is 0.995 (C.I.95%: 0.993-0.997). The authors' rank according to the h-index differed from the Ah-index; where, scientists with high self-citations lost their position from the top of the list of authors according to our new indicator.
Conclusion: The findings of this study showed that by adjusting the self-citation of scientists, the position of the author in the list of authors would be changed and becomes fairer.
Keywords
Bibliometrics
H-index
Information
Self-citation
Subjects

  1. Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102(46):16569-72. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0507655102.

  2. Waltman L, Van Eck NJ. The inconsistency of the h‐index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012;63(2):406-15. doi: 10.1002/asi.21678.

  3. Egghe L. The Hirsch index and related impact measures. Annual review of information science and technology. 2010;44(1):65-114. doi: 10.1002/aris.2010.1440440109.

  4. Bornmann L, Daniel HD. What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 2007;58(9):1381-5. doi: 10.1002/asi.20609.

  5. Egghe L. How to improve the h-index. The scientist. 2006;20(3):15-6.

  6. Schreiber M. A case study of the Hirsch index for 26 non‐prominent physicists. Annalen der Physik. 2007;519(9):640-52. doi: 10.1002/andp.20075190904.

  7. Egghe L, Ravichandra Rao I. The influence of the broadness of a query of a topic on its h‐index: Models and examples of the h‐index of n‐grams. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2008;59(10):1688-93. doi: 10.1002/asi.20843.

  8. Hyland K. Self‐citation and self‐reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 2003;54(3):251-9. doi: 10.1002/asi.10204.

  9. Moed HF. Citation analysis in research evaluation. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2006. doi: 10.3233/ISU-2006-26217.

  10. Fowler J, Aksnes D. Does self-citation pay? Scientometrics. 2007;72(3):427-37. doi: 10.1007/s11192-007-1777-2.

  11. Ioannidis JP. A generalized view of self-citation: direct, co-author, collaborative, and coercive induced self-citation. J Psychosom Res. 2015;78(1):7-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.11.008.

  12. Khaji A, Saadat S. Is self-citation ethical? Iranian Journal of Microbiology. 2014;6(1):35-44.

Health Management & Information Science
Volume 12, Issue 1
Winter 2025
Pages 57-61