4.1 Article

Understanding Traditional Research Impact Metrics

Journal

CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 164-166

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000530

Keywords

research impact metrics; impact factor; SCImago journal rank; Eigenfactor score

Funding

  1. AOSpine
  2. Medtronic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Traditionally, the success of a researcher has been judged by the number of publications he or she has published in peer-review, indexed, high impact journals. However, to quantify the impact of research in the wider scientific community, a number of traditional metrics have been used, including Impact Factor, SCImago Journal Rank, Eigenfactor Score, and Article Influence Score. This article attempts to provide a broad overview of the main traditional impact metrics that have been used to assess scholarly output and research impact. We determine that there is no perfect all-encompassing metric to measure research impact, and, in the modern era, no single traditional metric is capable of accommodating all facets of research impact. Academics and researchers should be aware of the advantages and limitations of traditional metrics and should be judicious when selecting any metrics for an objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available