The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Eigenfactor™ Metrics: Figure 1.
Open accessAbstract
Quantitative metrics are poor choices for assessing the research output of an individual scholar. Summing impact factors, counting citations, tallying an h-index, or looking at Eigenfactor™ Scores (described below)—none of these methods are adequate compared with what should be the gold standard
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
Cited by
Hutchins, B. I., Yuan, X., Anderson, J. M., & Santangelo, G. M. (2016) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002541 · Cited by 500
Xia, F., Wang, W., Bekele, T. M., & Liu, H. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Big Data · doi:10.1109/tbdata.2016.2641460 · Cited by 266
Ranjan, C. K. (2017) · Medical Journal Armed Forces India · doi:10.1016/j.mjafi.2017.03.008 · Cited by 36
Prediction of robust scientific facts from literature
Belikov, A. V., Rzhetsky, A., & Evans, J. (2022) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00474-8 · Cited by 30
Sandesh, N., & Wahrekar, S. (2017) · Medicine and Pharmacy Reports · doi:10.15386/cjmed-704 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Bergstrom, C. T., West, J. D., & Wiseman, M. A.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2008-11-05
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 45
- Pages
- 11433-11434
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W1958739611
- Cited by
- 407
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: The Eigenfactor™ Metrics: Figure 1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.0003-08.2008
- The paper
- Bergstrom, C. T., West, J. D., & Wiseman, M. A. (2008). The Eigenfactor™ Metrics: Figure 1. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0003-08.2008
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.
