{"title":"[SciELO网络健康科学期刊的影响力和声望指标:比较研究]。","authors":"Cristina Bojo Canales, Javier Sanz-Valero","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The use of bibliometric indicators to measure the quality of scientific journals is a general practice in all areas of science. The WoS and Scopus databases continue to be the reference sources to obtain bibliographic indicators. Others such as SciELO network offer indicators about Ibero-American science, which are scarcely collected in WoS and Scopus. The aim of this work was to analyze the association of the indicators proposed by SciELO for health sciences journals, with the most widely used impact and indicators and to study the complementarity of the existing prestige indicators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Analytical correlational study between SciELO indicators, with impact and prestige indicators from Journal Citation Report, Scopus and Web of Science. The results refer to 2018, the most recent and complete data available. Association between the qualitative variables was analyzed using the chi-square test, and the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed for the quantitative variables using the Tukey method as a post hoc test. To obtain the relationship between quantitative variables, Pearson's correlation coefficient was used and Spearman's coefficient for ordinal variables. The level of significance used in all the hypothesis tests was α≤0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SciELO Impact Factor showed a weak correlation both, with Journal Citation Report (R=0.36; p=0.003), and Scopus Cite Score (R=0.39; p=0.001). The association between the H index of the Web of Science andthe H index of Scopus with the H index of SciELO was weak in both cases (R=0.45; p<0.001 and R=0.340; p=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Indicators proposed by SciELO, for health journals, did not show an association with those of WoS or Scopus. The weak correlation between Impact Factor and Cite Score with SciELO Impact Factor, converts the latter into a necessary \"metrics\" to assess journals excluded from the \"mainstream\" and fundamentally those from the Latin American region. The need of using the prestige indicators to fill in the impact indicators, has not been proven in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":47152,"journal":{"name":"Revista Espanola De Salud Publica","volume":"94 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11582893/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Impact and prestige indicators of SciELO network health sciences journals: comparative study.]\",\"authors\":\"Cristina Bojo Canales, Javier Sanz-Valero\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The use of bibliometric indicators to measure the quality of scientific journals is a general practice in all areas of science. The WoS and Scopus databases continue to be the reference sources to obtain bibliographic indicators. Others such as SciELO network offer indicators about Ibero-American science, which are scarcely collected in WoS and Scopus. The aim of this work was to analyze the association of the indicators proposed by SciELO for health sciences journals, with the most widely used impact and indicators and to study the complementarity of the existing prestige indicators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Analytical correlational study between SciELO indicators, with impact and prestige indicators from Journal Citation Report, Scopus and Web of Science. The results refer to 2018, the most recent and complete data available. Association between the qualitative variables was analyzed using the chi-square test, and the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed for the quantitative variables using the Tukey method as a post hoc test. To obtain the relationship between quantitative variables, Pearson's correlation coefficient was used and Spearman's coefficient for ordinal variables. The level of significance used in all the hypothesis tests was α≤0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SciELO Impact Factor showed a weak correlation both, with Journal Citation Report (R=0.36; p=0.003), and Scopus Cite Score (R=0.39; p=0.001). The association between the H index of the Web of Science andthe H index of Scopus with the H index of SciELO was weak in both cases (R=0.45; p<0.001 and R=0.340; p=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Indicators proposed by SciELO, for health journals, did not show an association with those of WoS or Scopus. The weak correlation between Impact Factor and Cite Score with SciELO Impact Factor, converts the latter into a necessary \\\"metrics\\\" to assess journals excluded from the \\\"mainstream\\\" and fundamentally those from the Latin American region. The need of using the prestige indicators to fill in the impact indicators, has not been proven in this study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Espanola De Salud Publica\",\"volume\":\"94 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11582893/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Espanola De Salud Publica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Espanola De Salud Publica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:使用文献计量指标来衡量科学期刊的质量是所有科学领域的普遍做法。WoS 和 Scopus 数据库仍然是获取文献指标的参考来源。其他一些数据库,如 SciELO 网络,提供了 WoS 和 Scopus 很少收集的伊比利亚-美洲科学指标。这项工作的目的是分析 SciELO 提出的健康科学期刊指标与最广泛使用的影响和指标之间的关联,并研究现有声望指标的互补性:方法:SciELO指标与期刊引文报告、Scopus和Web of Science中的影响力和声望指标之间的相关性分析研究。研究结果参考了 2018 年的最新完整数据。定性变量之间的关联采用卡方检验进行分析,定量变量采用方差分析(ANOVA),并使用Tukey法进行事后检验。定量变量之间的关系采用皮尔逊相关系数,序数变量采用斯皮尔曼系数。所有假设检验的显著性水平均为α≤0.05:结果:SciELO 影响因子与期刊引文报告(R=0.36;P=0.003)和 Scopus 引用得分(R=0.39;P=0.001)均呈弱相关。Web of Science 的 H 指数和 Scopus 的 H 指数与 SciELO 的 H 指数之间的联系都很弱(R=0.45;p 结论:SciELO提出的健康期刊指标与WoS或Scopus的指标没有关联。影响因子和引文分数与 SciELO 影响因子之间的相关性很弱,这使后者成为评估被排除在 "主流 "期刊之外的期刊的必要 "指标",从根本上说,也是评估拉丁美洲地区期刊的必要 "指标"。本研究并未证明有必要使用声望指标来填补影响指标。
[Impact and prestige indicators of SciELO network health sciences journals: comparative study.]
Objective: The use of bibliometric indicators to measure the quality of scientific journals is a general practice in all areas of science. The WoS and Scopus databases continue to be the reference sources to obtain bibliographic indicators. Others such as SciELO network offer indicators about Ibero-American science, which are scarcely collected in WoS and Scopus. The aim of this work was to analyze the association of the indicators proposed by SciELO for health sciences journals, with the most widely used impact and indicators and to study the complementarity of the existing prestige indicators.
Methods: Analytical correlational study between SciELO indicators, with impact and prestige indicators from Journal Citation Report, Scopus and Web of Science. The results refer to 2018, the most recent and complete data available. Association between the qualitative variables was analyzed using the chi-square test, and the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed for the quantitative variables using the Tukey method as a post hoc test. To obtain the relationship between quantitative variables, Pearson's correlation coefficient was used and Spearman's coefficient for ordinal variables. The level of significance used in all the hypothesis tests was α≤0.05.
Results: The SciELO Impact Factor showed a weak correlation both, with Journal Citation Report (R=0.36; p=0.003), and Scopus Cite Score (R=0.39; p=0.001). The association between the H index of the Web of Science andthe H index of Scopus with the H index of SciELO was weak in both cases (R=0.45; p<0.001 and R=0.340; p=0.003).
Conclusions: Indicators proposed by SciELO, for health journals, did not show an association with those of WoS or Scopus. The weak correlation between Impact Factor and Cite Score with SciELO Impact Factor, converts the latter into a necessary "metrics" to assess journals excluded from the "mainstream" and fundamentally those from the Latin American region. The need of using the prestige indicators to fill in the impact indicators, has not been proven in this study.