The coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19), which is caused by SARS-CoV-2, has become a worldwide public health crisis. Published clinical data from China and other countries have shown a much higher risk of developing CO...The coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19), which is caused by SARS-CoV-2, has become a worldwide public health crisis. Published clinical data from China and other countries have shown a much higher risk of developing COVID-19 and dying from the disease among the elderly, especially among those who had preexisting hypertension, cardiovascular diseases(CVD) and diabetes mellitus[1].展开更多
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the coverage of the scientific literature in Scopus and Web of Science from the perspective of research evaluation.Design/methodology/approach: The academic communities ...Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the coverage of the scientific literature in Scopus and Web of Science from the perspective of research evaluation.Design/methodology/approach: The academic communities of Norway have agreed on certain criteria for what should be included as original research publications in research evaluation and funding contexts. These criteria have been applied since 2004 in a comprehensive bibliographic database called the Norwegian Science Index(NSI). The relative coverages of Scopus and Web of Science are compared with regard to publication type, field of research and language.Findings: Our results show that Scopus covers 72 percent of the total Norwegian scientific and scholarly publication output in 2015 and 2016, while the corresponding figure for Web of Science Core Collection is 69 percent. The coverages are most comprehensive in medicine and health(89 and 87 percent) and in the natural sciences and technology(85 and 84 percent). The social sciences(48 percent in Scopus and 40 percent in Web of Science Core Collection) and particularly the humanities(27 and 23 percent) are much less covered in the two international data sources. Research limitation: Comparing with data from only one country is a limitation of the study, but the criteria used to define a country's scientific output as well as the identification of patterns of field-dependent partial representations in Scopus and Web of Science should be recognizable and useful also for other countries. Originality/value: The novelty of this study is the criteria-based approach to studying coverage problems in the two data sources.展开更多
In the world of science, recognition of scientific performance is strongly correlated with publication visibility and interest generated among other researchers, which is evident by downloads and citations. A publishe...In the world of science, recognition of scientific performance is strongly correlated with publication visibility and interest generated among other researchers, which is evident by downloads and citations. A published paper’s number of downloads and citations are the best indices of its importance and are useful measures of the researchers’ performance. However, the published paper should be valuated and indexed independently, and the prestige of the journal in which it is published should not influence the value of the paper itself. By participating in and presenting at congresses and international meetings, scientists strongly increase the visibility of their results and recognition of their research;this also promotes their publications. Status in Research Gate (RG), the so-called RG Score, the Percentile, and the h-index give researchers feedback about their performance, or their place and prestige within the scientific community. RG has become an excellent tool for disseminating scientific results and connecting researchers worldwide. RG also allows researchers to present achievements other than publications (e.g., membership in recognized associations such as the American Chemist Society, a biography in Marquis Who’s Who in the World, awards received, and/or ongoing projects). This paper discusses questions regarding how the RG Score, Percentile, and h-index are calculated, whether these methods are correct, and alternative criteria. RG also lists papers with falsified results and the journals that publish them. Thus, it may be appropriate to reduce the indices for such journals, authors, and the institutions with which these authors are affiliated.展开更多
高校科技成果转化是我国高质量发展的重要新引擎,对其进行绩效评价的重要性日益凸显。面对评价过程中出现的不确定信息,引入云模型,提出了一种基于博弈论组合赋权和云模型的高校科技成果转化绩效评价模型,并采用IKLCM(improved Kullback...高校科技成果转化是我国高质量发展的重要新引擎,对其进行绩效评价的重要性日益凸显。面对评价过程中出现的不确定信息,引入云模型,提出了一种基于博弈论组合赋权和云模型的高校科技成果转化绩效评价模型,并采用IKLCM(improved Kullback-Leibler divergence based on cloud model)法计算云相似度距离,得出评价结果。通过对西南地区5个省份的高校进行实证分析,结果表明,该模型综合考虑主客观因素,组合权重科学合理,绩效云模型评价能得到准确可靠的评价结果。展开更多
文摘The coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19), which is caused by SARS-CoV-2, has become a worldwide public health crisis. Published clinical data from China and other countries have shown a much higher risk of developing COVID-19 and dying from the disease among the elderly, especially among those who had preexisting hypertension, cardiovascular diseases(CVD) and diabetes mellitus[1].
文摘Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the coverage of the scientific literature in Scopus and Web of Science from the perspective of research evaluation.Design/methodology/approach: The academic communities of Norway have agreed on certain criteria for what should be included as original research publications in research evaluation and funding contexts. These criteria have been applied since 2004 in a comprehensive bibliographic database called the Norwegian Science Index(NSI). The relative coverages of Scopus and Web of Science are compared with regard to publication type, field of research and language.Findings: Our results show that Scopus covers 72 percent of the total Norwegian scientific and scholarly publication output in 2015 and 2016, while the corresponding figure for Web of Science Core Collection is 69 percent. The coverages are most comprehensive in medicine and health(89 and 87 percent) and in the natural sciences and technology(85 and 84 percent). The social sciences(48 percent in Scopus and 40 percent in Web of Science Core Collection) and particularly the humanities(27 and 23 percent) are much less covered in the two international data sources. Research limitation: Comparing with data from only one country is a limitation of the study, but the criteria used to define a country's scientific output as well as the identification of patterns of field-dependent partial representations in Scopus and Web of Science should be recognizable and useful also for other countries. Originality/value: The novelty of this study is the criteria-based approach to studying coverage problems in the two data sources.
文摘In the world of science, recognition of scientific performance is strongly correlated with publication visibility and interest generated among other researchers, which is evident by downloads and citations. A published paper’s number of downloads and citations are the best indices of its importance and are useful measures of the researchers’ performance. However, the published paper should be valuated and indexed independently, and the prestige of the journal in which it is published should not influence the value of the paper itself. By participating in and presenting at congresses and international meetings, scientists strongly increase the visibility of their results and recognition of their research;this also promotes their publications. Status in Research Gate (RG), the so-called RG Score, the Percentile, and the h-index give researchers feedback about their performance, or their place and prestige within the scientific community. RG has become an excellent tool for disseminating scientific results and connecting researchers worldwide. RG also allows researchers to present achievements other than publications (e.g., membership in recognized associations such as the American Chemist Society, a biography in Marquis Who’s Who in the World, awards received, and/or ongoing projects). This paper discusses questions regarding how the RG Score, Percentile, and h-index are calculated, whether these methods are correct, and alternative criteria. RG also lists papers with falsified results and the journals that publish them. Thus, it may be appropriate to reduce the indices for such journals, authors, and the institutions with which these authors are affiliated.
文摘高校科技成果转化是我国高质量发展的重要新引擎,对其进行绩效评价的重要性日益凸显。面对评价过程中出现的不确定信息,引入云模型,提出了一种基于博弈论组合赋权和云模型的高校科技成果转化绩效评价模型,并采用IKLCM(improved Kullback-Leibler divergence based on cloud model)法计算云相似度距离,得出评价结果。通过对西南地区5个省份的高校进行实证分析,结果表明,该模型综合考虑主客观因素,组合权重科学合理,绩效云模型评价能得到准确可靠的评价结果。
