Database and Research Metrics in Scientific Research: A Critical Evaluation

Saini, Pawan K, Nayak, Satyajit, Parida, Dillip Kumar and Dash, Abinash Database and Research Metrics in Scientific Research: A Critical Evaluation. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 2024, vol. CI, n. 9, pp. 92-100. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[thumbnail of DATABASE AND RESEARCH METRICS IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.pdf]
Preview
Text
DATABASE AND RESEARCH METRICS IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.pdf

Download (330kB) | Preview

English abstract

This study delves into the significance of databases and explores the evolving landscape of research metrics within the scientific community and examines the various metrics used to evaluate the impact and significance of research outputs. The study underscores the importance of databases and research metrics in shaping the trajectory of scientific research and highlights the ongoing efforts to refine and enhance these tools to meet the evolving needs of the research community. Authors found that a multifaceted approach that combines traditional measures such as peer review, qualitative analysis, and data synthesis with new measures and measures of public participation is essential to in creating and enhancing a responsible research environment.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Databases, research metrics, scientific research, impact factor, citation analysis, altmetrics, h-index, i10-index, g-index
Subjects: H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HL. Databases and database Networking.
Depositing user: Mr. Satyajit Nayak
Date deposited: 01 Jun 2025 00:28
Last modified: 01 Jun 2025 00:28
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/46836

References

Callahan, A., Winnenburg, R., & Shah, N. H. (2018). U-Index, a dataset and an impact metric for informatics tools and databases. Scientific data, 5(1), 1-10.

Bornmann, L., Haunschild, R., & Mutz, R. (2021). Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00903-w

Tabah, A.N. (1999). Literature dynamics: Studies on growth, diffusion, and epidemics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 34, 249–286.

Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2015). Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Journal of the association for information science and technology, 66(11), 2215-2222. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23329

Hine, C. (2006). Databases as scientific instruments and their role in the ordering of scientific work. Social Studies of Science, 36(2), 269-298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312706054047

Newton, A. I., & Gomathi, P. (2017). Application of metric Study in Library and Information Science Research Field. Science and Humanities, pp. 219–226.

Das, A. K. (2015). Research evaluation metrics. In Introduction to Research Evaluation Metrics and Related Indicators, eds B. K. Sen and S. Mishra (Paris: UNESCO), 5–18.

Galison, Peter (1997). Three Laboratories, Social Research 64(3): 1127–55.

Hawkins, D. T. (1987). The commodity nature of information. Online, 11(1), 67-70.

Hawkins, D. T., Levy, L. R., & Montgomery, K. L. (1988). Knowledge gateways: the building blocks∗. Information processing & management, 24(4), 459-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(88)90048-9

Raza, A., Rashid Kausar, A., & Paul, D. (2007). The social democratization of knowledge: some critical reflections on e‐learning. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 1(1), 64-74. DOI 10.1108/17504970710745210

Shah, N., & Song, Y. (2015). S-index: towards better metrics for quantifying research impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.03650.

Box, S. (2010). Performance-based funding for public research in tertiary education institutions: Country experiences. In OECD, Performance-Based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264094611-6-en

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429-431.

Haddow, G., & Hammarfelt, B. (2019). Quality, impact, and quantification: Indicators and metrics use by social scientists. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(1), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24097

Sutherland, W. J., Goulson, D., Potts, S. G., & Dicks, L. V. (2011). Quantifying the impact and relevance of scientific research. PloS one, 6(11), e27537. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027537

Grant, J., Brutscher, P. B., Kirk, S. E., Butler, L., & Wooding, S. (2010). Capturing Research Impacts: A Review of International Practice. Documented Briefing. Rand Corporation.

Lane, J., & Bertuzzi, S. (2011). Measuring the results of science investments. Science, 331(6018), 678-680.

Carpenter, C. R., Cone, D. C., & Sarli, C. C. (2014). Using publication metrics to highlight academic productivity and research impact. Academic emergency medicine, 21(10), 1160-1172.

Sinatra, R., Wang, D., Deville, P., Song, C., & Barabási, A. L. (2016). Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact. Science, 354(6312), aaf5239. doi:10.1126/science.aaf5239

Iyengar, K. P., & Vaishya, R. (2023). level metrics: A new approach to quantify reach and impact of published research. Journal of Orthopaedics, 40, 83-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2023.05.001


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item