A tudománymetriai mutatók közötti összefüggések vizsgálata a hazai gazdaságtudományi képzések oktatói körében

Az MTMT adataira épülő empirikus kutatás a hazai gazdaságtudományi képzések oktatói publikációs és idézettségi teljesítményének mérésére használható mutatók közötti összefüggések feltárására irányult. A szerzők vizsgálataikat 17 magyar felsőoktatási intézmény docens munkakörben foglalkoztatott 681 oktatójának főbb tudománymetriai adataira alapozták. Vizsgálati eredményeik jelentős eltérést igazolnak az intézmények között a publikációs teljesítmény színvonalában. A magas besorolású cikkek számával mért publikációs teljesítmény és a Hirsch-index értéke között egyirányú összefüggés állapítható meg a vizsgált intézmények esetében. Bizonyították, hogy a tudományos visszhangot mérő Hirsch-index értéke jelentősen alacsonyabb az egy oktatóra vetítve legnagyobb hallgatói létszámmal rendelkező intézmények esetében. Eredményeik rámutatnak arra, hogy az MTA IX. Osztálya által A, illetve B kategóriásként elismert folyóiratot gondozó felsőoktatási intézmények docensei magasabb tudományos publikációs teljesítménnyel rendelkeznek a magas besorolású hazai folyóirattal nem rendelkező intézmények oktatóihoz képest.

Gender, Productivity, and Philanthropic Fundraising in Academic Oncology

Background: Philanthropic donations are important funding sources in academic oncology but may be vulnerable to implicit or explicit biases toward women. However, the influence of gender on donations has not been assessed quantitatively. Methods: We queried a large academic cancer center’s development database for donations over 10 years to the sundry funds of medical and radiation oncologists. Types of donations and total amounts for medical oncologists and radiation oncologists hired prior to April 1, 2018 (allowing ≥2 years on faculty prior to query), were obtained. We also obtained publicly available data on physician/academic rank, gender, specialty, disease site, and Hirsch-index (h-index), a metric of productivity. Results: We identified 127 physicians: 64% men and 36% women. Median h-index was higher for men (31; range, 1–100) than women (17; range, 3–77; P=.003). Men were also more likely to have spent more time at the institution (median, 15 years; range, 2–43 years) than women (median, 12.5 years; range, 3–22 years; P=.025). Those receiving donations were significantly more likely to be men (70% vs 30%; P=.034). Men received significantly higher median amounts ($259,474; range, $0–$29,507,784) versus women ($37,485; range, $0–$7,483,726; P=.019). On multivariable analysis, only h-index and senior academic rank were associated with donation receipt, and only h-index with donation amount. Conclusions: We found significant gender disparities in receipt of philanthropic donations on unadjusted analyses. However, on multivariable analyses, only productivity and rank were significantly associated with donations, suggesting gender disparities in productivity and promotions may contribute to these differences.

Comparative analysis of domestic psychologists and ergonomists’ publication activity using citation indices

The advantages and disadvantages of indices for assessing scientists’ activities using the scientometric databases Web of Science (USA), Scopus (EU) and RSCI (RF) are considered. It is proposed to use such indicators as the citation index and the publication relevance index to objectify the data in addition to the known indicators, namely the number of publications, the number of links, the average number of citations per publication, the Hirsch index. It is shown that the main disadvantage of the h-index proposed by the American physicist Jorge Hirsch for assessing ergonomists’ scientific activities is not taking into account the relevance of breakthrough scientific results and inventions. The rating of 25 leading domestic psychologists and 25 domestic ergonomists is given, which is obtained from the RSCI database and it includes such indicators as the number of publications, the total number of citations, the average number of citations, the average number of citations per publication, and the Hirsch index. It is concluded that using relevance and citation indices is, to a certain extent, evidence of this scholar’ official recognition by the scientific community and the formal confirmation of his authority. It is shown that applying scientometric citation indices and their correct use in assessing scientists’ activities should be carried out by the qualified experts in the relevant field of knowledge.

ETHICAL EXAMINATION OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS IN MEDICINE: FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND RUSSIAN PRACTICE

Currently, much attention is paid to the correct presentation of the results of. This is not surprising, since international standards used for assessing the effectiveness of scientific clinical and pre-clinical studies in scientific publications activities are based on citation rates and the number of publications in peer-reviewed journals. This tradition originated in the UK and is the result of a struggle for grants in the scientific community. The Hirsch index (individual authors) type of assessment and the impact factor (journals) made it possible to quantitatively compare papers without referring to their content. The assessment of the latter was accomplished by editors of the journals, and it was assumed that it was objective. This method was consistent with the digitalization process, but it has not yet received an ethical assessment. This is happening not only because there is a fairly wide range of opinions on this issue in the scientific community [1], but also because moral plots are generally not referred to digital processes.

Algorithms of modified Hirsch index for the formation of ratings of university teachers in terms of publications and their quotes

Objective: To suggest an algorithm for assessing the results of the scientific activity of a teacher drawing on published works and their quotes, which should make it possible to consider the total quoting of significant publications determined by the Hirsch algorithm. To create a more advanced approach to the effective assessment of scientists’ publication activities compared to the Hirsch number. Methods: A systematization approach is used to systematize the total citation array, by separating it into the following citation arrays: 1) the basic, defined Hirsch index; 2) significant publications; 3) intensity of work. The resulting arrays formed the basis of the creation of three indices: h – Hirsch’s index, g – an index of significant publications and p – intensive work index. These indexes allowed us to determine the Euclidean norms gh – the index of basic significant publications and hp – the intensive work index of a teacher. The above indices make it possible to differentiate the teachers’ publication activities and produce better ranking in the team. Results: The ratings of a team of authors formed by the sample from Russian Science Citation Index using the Hirsch index and the gh-index are built. It is shown that more efficient compared to the Hirsch index is the proposed approach. Practical importance: The described approach to the formation of the rating position of the authors of publications in the creative team is based on a simple calculation and comparison of the modified Hirsch indices

Scientometric indicators and features of evaluating the scholars’ scientific activity effectiveness using citation indices (review of domestic and foreign studies)

Topical problems of domestic and foreign science studies associated with the contradictions in evaluating the contribution of domestic scientists to the world science are considered. The erroneousness of the approaches caused by the priority evaluation of the scientific activity effectiveness of Russian scientists based on using international scientometric ratings and databases is shown. The main tools of traditional scientometrics are presented, methodological approaches to determining the researchers’ ratings based on scientometric indicators are shown. Various options for modifying the calculations of the Hirsch index values for different numbers of publications are described. It is shown that, on the basis of the considered indices, it becomes possible to evaluate a scientist’s publication activity by three ratings, namely: rating of significant works; rating of work intensity; a complex rating, including both ones. When establishing a rating, it is advisable to give preference to the index of basic publications. As a result of a comparative analysis of domestic and foreign studies, it is revealed that scientometrics is a real tool for analyzing and evaluating scientists’ activities, scientific organizations and educational institutions.

ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC METRIC INDICATORS OF THE JOURNAL "TECHNICAL ELECTRODYNAMICS" 2018-2020

The directions of development of the journal "Technical Electrodynamics" in recent years are considered, its main scientometric indicators according to Scopus data for 2020 are analyzed, their comparison with the indicators of the previous two years is made. It is noted that indicators such as SJR, percentile, international cooperation decreased, the Hirsch index and quartiles remained at the same level. Ways to improve the performance of the journal are suggested. References 6.

Economic journals of Russia, their characteristics and network analysis

We study economic journals published in Russia and indexed in the Russian Index of Science Citation (RISC). We analyze citations of 466 journals for 2016–2020 and compare these journals using several metrics: total citation count, Hirsch index, Impact factor RISC, and Science Index RISC. We also use network analysis for citation graphs and compare journals by centrality indices: Copeland index and two new indices: Bundle and Pivotal. We found that “Voprosy Ekonomiki” is the only journal that is among the top-5 journals for all metrics. Other top journals differ for different metrics. We noticed that some top journals have a questionable reputation and the reason why they are among the top journals is a high number of publications, which makes classical journals less influential with respect to the metrics.

La oncología en el siglo XXI: de las terapias personalizadas ala inmunoterapia

La Lección Cajal es una conferencia anual dictada desde 2019 en la Universidad de Zaragoza por una figura académica relevante en su campo del saber, impulsada por el Vicerrectorado de Cultura y Proyección Social para conmemorar el 150 aniversario de la entrada de Santiago Ramón y Cajal en esta universidad, su «venerada alma mater». MARIANO BARBACID estudió Ciencias Químicas en la Universidad Complutense y se doctoró en 1974. Entre 1974 y 1977 completó su formación postdoctoral en el Instituto del Cáncer (NCI) de Estados Unidos. En 1978 formó su propio grupo de investigación en el NCI, donde trabajó hasta 1988. Durante la siguiente década (1988-1998) fue vicepresidente de Oncología Preclínica de la multinacional Bristol-Myers Squibb. En 1998 regresó a España para fundar y diri- gir el Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Oncológicas (CNIO). El Dr. Barbacid es miembro extranjero de la Academia de Ciencias de EE. UU., un honor que tan solo ostentan otros siete investigado- res españoles. En 2014 fue nombrado Fellow de la Academia de la Asociación Americana de Investigación en Cáncer (AACR), el primer español en recibir esta distinción. Es doctor honoris causa por la Universidad Internacional Menéndez Pelayo (1995), la Universidad de Cantabria (2011) y la Universidad de Barcelona (2014). En 2011 reci- bió la Gran Cruz del Dos de Mayo, la más alta distinción que otorga la Comunidad de Madrid. Entre los premios internacionales destacan la Medalla Burkitt (Irlanda, 2017), la Medalla de Honor de la Agencia Internacional del Cáncer de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (Francia, 2007) y el Premio Charles Rodolphe Brupbacher (Suiza, 2005). En la actualidad, el «Índice h» (Hirsch Index) del Dr. Barbacid es de 121, el más alto de España en las áreas de Bioquímica y Biología Molecular y el segundo más alto en Oncología.