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

Document Type : Short Communication

Authors

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

Main Subjects

References

  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
January 2025
Pages 57-61

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics