q2-Index: Quantitative and qualitative evaluation based on the number and impact of papers in the Hirsch core

MRET: Modified Recursive Elimination Technique for ranking author assessment parameters

In scientific research, assessing the impact and influence of authors is crucial for evaluating their scholarly contributions. Whereas in literature, multitudinous parameters have been developed to quantify the productivity and significance of researchers, including the publication count, citation count, well-known h index and its extensions and variations. However, with a plethora of available assessment metrics, it is vital to identify and prioritize the most effective metrics. To address the complexity of this task, we employ a powerful deep learning technique known as the Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) classifier for the classification and the ranking purposes. By leveraging the MLP's capacity to discern patterns within datasets, we assign importance scores to each parameter using the proposed modified recursive elimination technique. Based on the importance scores, we ranked these parameters. Furthermore, in this study, we put forth a comprehensive statistical analysis of the top-ranked author assessment parameters, encompassing a vast array of 64 distinct metrics. This analysis gives us treasured insights in between these parameters, shedding light on the potential correlations and dependencies that may affect assessment outcomes. In the statistical analysis, we combined these parameters by using seven well-known statistical methods, such as arithmetic means, harmonic means, geometric means etc. After combining the parameters, we sorted the list of each pair of parameters and analyzed the top 10, 50, and 100 records. During this analysis, we counted the occurrence of the award winners. For experimental proposes, data collection was done from the field of Mathematics. This dataset consists of 525 individuals who are yet to receive their awards along with 525 individuals who have been recognized as potential award winners by certain well known and prestigious scientific societies belonging to the fields' of mathematics in the last three decades. The results of this study revealed that, in ranking of the author assessment parameters, the normalized h index achieved the highest importance score as compared to the remaining sixty-three parameters. Furthermore, the statistical analysis results revealed that the Trigonometric Mean (TM) outperformed the other six statistical models. Moreover, based on the analysis of the parameters, specifically the M Quotient and FG index, it is evident that combining these parameters with any other parameter using various statistical models consistently produces excellent results in terms of the percentage score for returning awardees.

Bibliometric and visual analysis of ACE2/Ang 1-7/MasR axis in diabetes and its microvascular complications from 2000 to 2023

Background

The pathogenesis of diabetes and its microvascular complications are intimately associated with renin angiotensin system dysregulation. Evidence suggests the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2)/angiotensin 1-7 (Ang 1-7)/Mas receptor (MasR) axis regulates metabolic imbalances, inflammatory responses, reduces oxidative stress, and sustains microvascular integrity, thereby strengthening defences against diabetic conditions. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the ACE2/Ang 1-7/MasR axis in diabetes and its microvascular complications over the past two decades, focusing on key contributors, research hotspots, and thematic trends.

Methods

This cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of 349 English-language publications was performed using HistCite, VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Bibliometrix R for visualization and metric analysis. Primary analytical metrics included publication count and keyword trend dynamics.

Results

The United States, contributing 105 articles, emerged as the most productive country, with the University of Florida leading institutions with 18 publications. Benter IF was the most prolific author with 14 publications, and Clinical Science was the leading journal with 13 articles. A total of 151 of the 527 author's keywords with two or more occurrences clustered into four major clusters: diabetic microvascular pathogenesis, metabolic systems, type 2 diabetes, and coronavirus infections. Keywords such as "SARS", "ACE2", "coronavirus", "receptor" and "infection" displayed the strongest citation bursts. The thematic evolution in this field expanded from focusing on the renin angiotensin system (2002-2009) to incorporating ACE2 and diabetes metabolism (2010-2016). The latter period (2017-2023) witnessed a significant surge in diabetes research, reflecting the impact of COVID-19 and associated conditions such as diabetic retinopathy and cardiomyopathy.

Conclusions

This scientometric study offers a detailed analysis of the ACE2/Ang 1-7/MasR axis in diabetes and its microvascular complications, providing valuable insights for future research directions.

A review on h-index and its alternative indices

In recent years, several scientometrics and bibliometrics indicators were proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of individuals, institutions, colleges, universities and research teams. The h-index gives a breakthrough in the research community for assessing the scientific impact of an individual. It got a lot of attention due to its simplicity, and several other indicators were proposed to extend the properties of the h-index and to overcome its shortcomings. In this literature review, we have discussed the advantages and limitations of almost all scientometrics and bibliometrics indicators, which have been categorised into seven categories based on their properties: (1) complement of h-index, (2) based on total number of authors, (3) based on publication age, (4) combination of two indices, (5) based on excess citation count, (6) based on total publication count and (7) based on other variants. The primary objective of this article is to study all those indicators which have been proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of an individual researcher or a group of researchers.

Evolution of the Autism Literature and the Influence of Parents: A Scientific Mapping in Web of Science

Parents interventions are relevant to address autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The objective of this study is to analyze the importance and evolution of ASD and its relationship with the parents (ASD-PAR) in the publications indexed in Web of Science. For this, a bibliometric methodology has been used, based on a scientific mapping of the reported documents. We have worked with an analysis unit of 1381 documents. The results show that the beginnings of scientific production date back to 1971. There are two clearly differentiated moments in scientific production. A first moment (1971-2004), where the production volume is low. A second moment (2005-2019), where the volume of production increases considerably. Therefore, it can be said that the subject began to be relevant for the scientific community from 2005 to the present. The keyword match rate between set periods marks a high level of match between periods. It is concluded that the main focus of the research on ASD-PAR is on the stress that is generated in families with children with ASD, in addition to the family problems that the fact that these children also have behavior problems can cause.

Review of Research Trends in Learning and the Internet in Higher Education

Within the scientific literature, there has been much debate about the use of the Internet in teaching in university contexts. The potential of this tool and its educational possibilities is well documented. The main purpose of this study is to analyze the use of the Internet in university teaching from a bibliometric perspective. To analyze scientific works, scientific mapping strategies have been used; for example, exploring the co-words and co-authors in works on this topic. We have worked with an analysis unit of 5118 documents which are indexed in the Web of Science database. Among the findings of this research, it can be highlighted that most publications are in English—the topic has been thoroughly studied and works have been published in this language over time. Moreover, the United States is the country which is most productive in relation to educational and computing fields. The most relevant topics themes are “e-learning”, “systems” and “Internet of Things”.

Evaluation of h and h-type Indices for Research Performance at Researcher's Level

Various new performance evaluation indices for impact have been proposed and studied in various contexts. This study carried out a quantitative evaluation of the case of Malaysian engineering researchers at the micro level using a scientometric approach. In order to understand the behavior of new developments, a comparative performance evaluation is carried out of h-index, a set of h-type indices along with publication and citation metrics. Findings are compared with earlier major studies. We looked for institutional h-index and researchers’ h-index scores and did not find any relationship. Exploratory Factor Analysis is employed to examine the valid categorization and to study the underlying dimensions of the studied metrics and indices. The inter-correlation among h-index, its variants, and traditional metrics is probed in detail. The h, q and g-indices along with publication and citation hold the position on ‘quantity of the productive core’, while the R index showed equal loading on both cores. For the case of Malaysian engineering researchers, two conspicuous findings are observed about the total citation and g-index. These have association with the first component named as ‘quantity of the productive core.’ Our findings strengthen the point that citation count has a strong association with the ‘quantity of the productive core’ and cannot be used as sole impact evaluation measure.

The association between four citation metrics and peer rankings of research influence of Australian researchers in six fields of public health

Doubt about the relevance, appropriateness and transparency of peer review has promoted the use of citation metrics as a viable adjunct or alternative in the assessment of research impact. It is also commonly acknowledged that research metrics will not replace peer review unless they are shown to correspond with the assessment of peers. This paper evaluates the relationship between researchers' influence as evaluated by their peers and various citation metrics representing different aspects of research output in 6 fields of public health in Australia. For four fields, the results showed a modest positive correlation between different research metrics and peer assessments of research influence. However, for two fields, tobacco and injury, negative or no correlations were found. This suggests a peer understanding of research influence within these fields differed from visibility in the mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific literature. This research therefore recommends the use of both peer review and metrics in a combined approach in assessing research influence. Future research evaluation frameworks intent on incorporating metrics should first analyse each field closely to determine what measures of research influence are valued highly by members of that research community. This will aid the development of comprehensive and relevant frameworks with which to fairly and transparently distribute research funds or approve promotion applications.