The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields
Open accessAbstract
The h-index and some related bibliometric indices have received a lot of attention from the scientific community in the last few years due to some of their good properties (easiness of computation, balance between quantity of publications and their impact and so on). Many different indicators have been developed in order to extend and overcome the drawbacks of the original Hirsch proposal. In this contribution we present a comprehensive review on the h-index and related indicators field. From the initial h-index proposal we study their main advantages, drawbacks and the main applications that we can find in the literature. A description of many of the h-related indices that have been developed along with their main characteristics and some of the works that analyze and compare them are presented. We also review the most up to date standardization studies that allow a fair comparison by means of the h-index among scientists from different research areas and finally, some works that analyze the computation of the h-index and related indices by using different citation databases (ISI Citation Indexes, Google Scholar and Scopus) are introduced.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20677 · Cited by 974
Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0806977105 · Cited by 828
Cited by
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators
Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007 · Cited by 1,356
Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories
Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/2158244019829575 · Cited by 1,257
A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002 · Cited by 1,002
25years at Knowledge-Based Systems: A bibliometric analysis
Cobo, M. J., Martínez, M. A., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Fujita, H., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2014.12.035 · Cited by 580
Self-citationCircular economy in the building and construction sector: a scientific evolution analysis
Norouzi, M., Chàfer, M., Cabeza, L. F., Jiménez, L., & Boer, D. (2021) · Journal of Building Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102704 · Cited by 482
Metadata
- Authors
- Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Informetrics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-10
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 273-289
- ISSN
- 1751-1577 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2169089330
- Cited by
- 848
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 43.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001
- The paper
- Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2009). h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
