A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field

John P. A. Ioannidis; Jeroen Baas; Richard Klavans; Kevin W. Boyack

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000384

Loading metrics

Open Access

The Community Page is a forum for organizations and societies to highlight their efforts to enhance the dissemination and value of scientific knowledge.

See all article types »

A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field

John P. A. Ioannidis ,

* E-mail: jioannid@stanford.edu

Affiliation Departments of Medicine, Health Research and Policy, Biomedical Data Science, and Statistics and Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3118-6859

⨯
Jeroen Baas,

Affiliation Research Intelligence, Elsevier B.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8005-4153

⨯
Richard Klavans,

Affiliation SciTech Strategies, Inc., Wayne, Pennsylvania, United States of America
⨯
Kevin W. Boyack

Affiliation SciTech Strategies, Inc., Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States of America

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7814-8951

⨯

A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field

John P. A. Ioannidis,
Jeroen Baas,
Richard Klavans,
Kevin W. Boyack

Published: August 12, 2019
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000384

Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Author misidentification

Posted by tofazzalislam on 15 Mar 2021 at 17:39 GMT

The formal comment titled “Updated science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators” by Ioannidis et al., which provides an update to their original 2019 article that introduced scientific standardized citation metrics databases of authors, included 26 Bangladeshi scientists in the top 2% of scientists based on career-long citation impact up until 2019. However, manual curation of the database revealed 41% error of their listed Bangladeshi researchers. Here, we describe the issues and attempt to find out the reasons behind the errors. We advise caution while interpreting results from the current one published, and suggest revisiting the database to improve the accuracy of its attribution. See details at https://doi.org/10.6084/m...

No competing interests declared.

Subject Areas
?

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.
We want your feedback. Do these Subject Areas make sense for this article? Click the target next to the incorrect Subject Area and let us know. Thanks for your help!

Scientists
Is the Subject Area "Scientists" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Citation analysis
Is the Subject Area "Citation analysis" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Bibliometrics
Is the Subject Area "Bibliometrics" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Scientific publishing
Is the Subject Area "Scientific publishing" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Clinical medicine
Is the Subject Area "Clinical medicine" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Communications
Is the Subject Area "Communications" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Immunology
Is the Subject Area "Immunology" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Telecommunications
Is the Subject Area "Telecommunications" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.

A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field

A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field

Reader Comments

Post Your Discussion Comment

Why should this posting be reviewed?

Thank You!

Author misidentification

Posted by tofazzalislam on 15 Mar 2021 at 17:39 GMT