The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bibliometrics: tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics
Open accessAbstract
Traditionally, the success of a researcher is assessed by the number of publications he or she publishes in peer-reviewed, indexed, high impact journals. This essential yardstick, often referred to as the impact of a specific researcher, is assessed through the use of various metrics. While researchers may be acquainted with such matrices, many do not know how to use them to enhance their careers. In addition to these metrics, a number of other factors should be taken into consideration to objectively evaluate a scientist's profile as a researcher and academician. Moreover, each metric has its own limitations that need to be considered when selecting an appropriate metric for evaluation. This paper provides a broad overview of the wide array of metrics currently in use in academia and research. Popular metrics are discussed and defined, including traditional metrics and article-level metrics, some of which are applied to researchers for a greater understanding of a particular concept, including varicocele that is the thematic area of this Special Issue of Asian Journal of Andrology. We recommend the combined use of quantitative and qualitative evaluation using judiciously selected metrics for a more objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“It is used to determine the relationships between topics in the disciplines represented in this literature set, which in turn, can assist in identifying areas (clusters) for current and future research that constitute the theoretical constructs or underlying themes of the research area (Eck and Waltman, 2010; Agarwal et al., 2016).”
From Characteristics and trends in acceptance and commitment therapy research: A bibliometric analysis (2022) · cites this paper as Agarwal et al., 2016
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“In this way, JIF also shows a certain level of discrimination against less popular publication types that, in certain disciplines, are as important as original research articles [2,26,45,46,224,225,229].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“Yet, only a minority of stakeholders employing bibliometric indicators are adequately familiar with their meaning and appropriate use [2,4,5,7].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“However, today, JIF is often misused due to a misinterpretation of its meaning, as it has become a standard tool in virtually all evaluation practices at all levels, usually without proper considerations of the rationale for its use [2,44,222,224-227].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“The same applies in evaluations of larger entities, such as research or academic institutions and countries, since they can only be compared to those that are similar in size [2,26].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“not all of the cited publications could be read at all by the authors [2].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“This phenomenon can be well illustrated by the 80-20 rule describing that, usually, the top 20% of papers tend to receive 80% of total citations, while remaining publications are cited very scarcely, if cited at all [2,272].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“The simple amount of publications does not reflect the scientific impact, since publication counts measure productivity, rather than quality [1,2].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“It is often argued that the scientific impact of any evaluated entity cannot be determined solely by citations due to the different citing behaviors and resulting incompatible citation counts between disciplines [1-3,5,260,267].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“this 'publish or perish' attitude, on the one hand, stimulates the productivity of researchers, but, on the other, creates a bias towards quantity, often overlooking quality [2,3,6-8,44,81,163,260,263,284-288].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [2]
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
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669
Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/520429a · Cited by 2,828
Garfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788
The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
Garfield, E. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · Cited by 2,770
Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
Seglen, P. O. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 · Cited by 2,447
Theory and practise of the g-index
Egghe, L. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 · Cited by 2,354
Sharing Detailed Research Data Is Associated with Increased Citation Rate
Piwowar, H. A., Day, R. S., & Fridsma, D. B. (2007) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000308 · Cited by 881
A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator
González-Pereira, B., Guerrero‐Bote, V. P., & Anegón, F. D. M. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.002 · Cited by 867
Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles
Eysenbach, G. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157 · Cited by 829
Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact
Lawrence, S. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35079151 · Cited by 797
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- McClellan, 2003, Specialist Control: The Publications Committee of the Académie Royale Des Sciences (Paris) 1700-1793.Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, i
- Bornmann, 2013, The normalization of citation counts based on classification systems.Publications, 78
- Garfield, 1972, Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation, Science, 471
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World
Pranckutė, R. (2021) · Publications · doi:10.3390/publications9010012 · Cited by 2,696
Roldán-Valadéz, E., Salazar-Ruiz, S.-Y., Contreras, R. I., & Rı́os, C. (2018) · Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) · doi:10.1007/s11845-018-1936-5 · Cited by 461
Blockchain applications in management: A bibliometric analysis and literature review
Tandon, A., Kaur, P., Mäntymäki, M., & Dhir, A. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120649 · Cited by 337
Current perspectives and trend of nanomedicine in cancer: A review and bibliometric analysis
Pei, Z., Chen, S., Ding, L., Liu, J., Cui, X., Li, F., & Qiu, F. (2022) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2022.10.023 · Cited by 220
Research trends on human trafficking: a bibliometric analysis using Scopus database
Sweileh, W. M. (2018) · Globalization and Health · doi:10.1186/s12992-018-0427-9 · Cited by 206
Metadata
- Authors
- Agarwal, A., Durairajanayagam, D., Tatagari, S., Esteves, S., Harlev, A., Henkel, R., Roychoudhury, S., Homa, S., Puchalt, N., Ramasamy, R., Majzoub, A., Ly, K., Tvrda, E., Assidi, M., Kesari, K., Sharma, R., Banihani, S., Ko, E., Abu-Elmagd, M., Gosalvez, J., & Bashiri, A.
- Affiliations
- Cleveland Clinic (US)
- Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
- University of the Western Cape (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Agarwal, Ashok
- ORCID
- Venue
- Asian Journal of Andrology
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 296
- ISSN
- 1008-682X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4770502
- OpenAlex
- W2263556835
- Cited by
- 639
- References
- 74
- Citations by year
- 2026: 59 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 121 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 79 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 2.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- Asian Journal of Andrology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (publishedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (acceptedVersion)
- Hispana (acceptedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- OakTrust (Texas A&M University Libraries) (submittedVersion)
- Biblos-e Archivo (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- bibliometric analysis, research impact, research metrics, article-level metrics, varicocele, research career development
- MeSH terms
- Authorship, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Bibliometrics, Biomedical Research, Journal Impact Factor, Open Access Publishing
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
