Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=27054017
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Evaluation of Scientific Outputs of Kashan University of Medical Sciences in
Scopus Citation Database based on Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley
Scientometric Measures
#MMPMID27054017
Batooli Z
; Ravandi SN
; Bidgoli MS
Electron Physician
2016[Feb]; 8
(2
): 2048-56
PMID27054017
show ga
INTRODUCTION: It is essential to evaluate the impact of scientific publications
through citation analysis in citation indexes. In addition, scientometric
measures of social media also should be assessed. These measures include how many
times the publications were read, viewed, and downloaded. The present study aimed
to assess the scientific output of scholars at Kashan University of Medical
Sciences by the end of March 2014 based on scientometric measures of Scopus,
ResearchGate, and Mendeley. METHODS: A survey method was used to study the
articles published in Scopus journals by scholars at Kashan University of Medical
Sciences by the end of March 2014. The required data were collected from Scopus,
ResearchGate, and Mendeley. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.
Also, the Spearman correlation was used between the number of views of articles
in ResearchGate with citation number of the articles in Scopus and reading
frequency of the articles in Mendeley with citation number in Scopus were
examined using the Spearman correlation in SPSS 16. RESULTS: Five-hundred and
thirty-three articles were indexed in the Scopus Citation Database by the end of
March 2014. Collectively, those articles were cited 1,315 times. The articles
were covered by ResearchGate (74%) more than Mendeley (44%). In addition, 98% of
the articles indexed in ResearchGate and 92% of the articles indexed in Mendeley
were viewed at least once. The results showed that there was a positive
correlation between the number of views of the articles in ResearchGate and
Mendeley and the number of citations of the articles in Scopus. CONCLUSION:
Coverage and the number of visitors were higher in ResearchGate than in Mendeley.
The increase in the number of views of articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley also
increased the number of citations of the papers. Social networks, such as
ResearchGate and Mendeley, also can be used as tools for the evaluation of
academics and scholars based on the scientific research they have conducted.
free
free
free
