Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees
Abstract Bibliometrics can help program directors to conduct objective and fair assessments of scholar impact, progress, and collaboration, as well as benchmark performance against peers and programs. However, different academic search engines use different methodologies to provide bibliometric info...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04462-2 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1823862627787341824 |
|---|---|
| author | Laura D. Davis Corbyn M. Gilmore Adriana Vargus Henry Ogbeifun Yong-Hee P. Chun Christopher R. Frei |
| author_facet | Laura D. Davis Corbyn M. Gilmore Adriana Vargus Henry Ogbeifun Yong-Hee P. Chun Christopher R. Frei |
| author_sort | Laura D. Davis |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Bibliometrics can help program directors to conduct objective and fair assessments of scholar impact, progress, and collaboration, as well as benchmark performance against peers and programs. However, different academic search engines use different methodologies to provide bibliometric information, so intermixing results from multiple search engines might contribute to inequitable decision-making. Google Scholar and Scopus provide useful bibliometric information for scholars, including the h-index; however, a search of the literature revealed h-index was higher in Google Scholar than Scopus in other scholar populations; therefore, we hypothesized that h-index might also be higher in Google Scholar than Scopus for translational science (TS) trainees. Trained investigators gathered scholarly profile information from Google Scholar and Scopus for all trainees from NIH-supported TS PhD and TS Training (TST) Programs for predoctoral and postdoctoral trainees. Investigators calculated number of citations/year and m-quotient using the data contained therein. M-quotient was defined as h-index divided by “n,” where “n” equaled the number of years since first publication. Investigators used the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test to compare bibliometrics (citations, citations/year, h-index, and m-quotient) from both sources for TS students and trainees. A total of 38 trainees (13 TS PhD students and 26 TST trainees) had active profiles in both Google Scholar and Scopus. Of the TST trainees, 21 were predoctoral and five were postdoctoral trainees. All four metrics (citations, citations/year, h-index, and m-quotient) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in Google Scholar than Scopus for the entire study population, TS PhD students, TST trainees, and TST predoctoral trainees. All four bibliometrics were numerically higher (but not significantly higher) in Google Scholar than Scopus for TST postdoctoral trainees as well. This is the first study to compare bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus among translational science trainees. We discovered higher overall citation counts in Google Scholar. Significant differences between Google Scholar and SCOPUS in bibliometrics, such as h-index, could impact the decisions made by program directors if the results are intermixed. Stakeholders should be consistent in their choice of academic search engine and avoid cross engine comparisons, as failure to do so might contribute to inequitable decision-making. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-0579fd2120ec4202b12db0fceae4ce76 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2662-9992 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-02-01 |
| publisher | Springer Nature |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| spelling | doaj-art-0579fd2120ec4202b12db0fceae4ce762025-02-09T12:25:41ZengSpringer NatureHumanities & Social Sciences Communications2662-99922025-02-011211410.1057/s41599-025-04462-2Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science traineesLaura D. Davis0Corbyn M. Gilmore1Adriana Vargus2Henry Ogbeifun3Yong-Hee P. Chun4Christopher R. Frei5College of Pharmacy, University of Texas at AustinCollege of Pharmacy, University of Texas at AustinCollege of Pharmacy, University of Texas at AustinCollege of Pharmacy, University of Texas at AustinSchool of Dentistry, University of Texas Health San AntonioCollege of Pharmacy, University of Texas at AustinAbstract Bibliometrics can help program directors to conduct objective and fair assessments of scholar impact, progress, and collaboration, as well as benchmark performance against peers and programs. However, different academic search engines use different methodologies to provide bibliometric information, so intermixing results from multiple search engines might contribute to inequitable decision-making. Google Scholar and Scopus provide useful bibliometric information for scholars, including the h-index; however, a search of the literature revealed h-index was higher in Google Scholar than Scopus in other scholar populations; therefore, we hypothesized that h-index might also be higher in Google Scholar than Scopus for translational science (TS) trainees. Trained investigators gathered scholarly profile information from Google Scholar and Scopus for all trainees from NIH-supported TS PhD and TS Training (TST) Programs for predoctoral and postdoctoral trainees. Investigators calculated number of citations/year and m-quotient using the data contained therein. M-quotient was defined as h-index divided by “n,” where “n” equaled the number of years since first publication. Investigators used the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test to compare bibliometrics (citations, citations/year, h-index, and m-quotient) from both sources for TS students and trainees. A total of 38 trainees (13 TS PhD students and 26 TST trainees) had active profiles in both Google Scholar and Scopus. Of the TST trainees, 21 were predoctoral and five were postdoctoral trainees. All four metrics (citations, citations/year, h-index, and m-quotient) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in Google Scholar than Scopus for the entire study population, TS PhD students, TST trainees, and TST predoctoral trainees. All four bibliometrics were numerically higher (but not significantly higher) in Google Scholar than Scopus for TST postdoctoral trainees as well. This is the first study to compare bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus among translational science trainees. We discovered higher overall citation counts in Google Scholar. Significant differences between Google Scholar and SCOPUS in bibliometrics, such as h-index, could impact the decisions made by program directors if the results are intermixed. Stakeholders should be consistent in their choice of academic search engine and avoid cross engine comparisons, as failure to do so might contribute to inequitable decision-making.https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04462-2 |
| spellingShingle | Laura D. Davis Corbyn M. Gilmore Adriana Vargus Henry Ogbeifun Yong-Hee P. Chun Christopher R. Frei Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| title | Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees |
| title_full | Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees |
| title_short | Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus for articles published by translational science trainees |
| title_sort | comparison of h index and other bibliometrics in google scholar and scopus for articles published by translational science trainees |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04462-2 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lauraddavis comparisonofhindexandotherbibliometricsingooglescholarandscopusforarticlespublishedbytranslationalsciencetrainees AT corbynmgilmore comparisonofhindexandotherbibliometricsingooglescholarandscopusforarticlespublishedbytranslationalsciencetrainees AT adrianavargus comparisonofhindexandotherbibliometricsingooglescholarandscopusforarticlespublishedbytranslationalsciencetrainees AT henryogbeifun comparisonofhindexandotherbibliometricsingooglescholarandscopusforarticlespublishedbytranslationalsciencetrainees AT yongheepchun comparisonofhindexandotherbibliometricsingooglescholarandscopusforarticlespublishedbytranslationalsciencetrainees AT christopherrfrei comparisonofhindexandotherbibliometricsingooglescholarandscopusforarticlespublishedbytranslationalsciencetrainees |