The document discusses various metrics for evaluating scholarly articles and journals, including the impact factor, h-index, and alternative proposed metrics. It notes criticisms of current metrics like the impact factor, including that it is calculated inconsistently, favors particular publishers, and does not accurately reflect the impact of individual articles. The document advocates developing new metrics that consider wider factors like citations, usage, social bookmarks, comments, and expert ratings.
31. Publikationstätigkeit (vollständige Publikationsliste, darunter Originalarbeiten als Erstautor/in, Seniorautor/in, Impact-Punkte insgesamt und in den letzten 5 Jahren, darunter jeweils gesondert ausgewiesen als Erst- und Seniorautor/in, persönlicher Scientific Citations Index (SCI, h-Index nach Web of Science) über alle Arbeiten) Publications: Complete list of publications, including original research papers as first author, senior author, impact points total and in the last 5 years, with marked first and last-authorships, personal Scientific Citations Index (SCI, h-Index according to web of science) for all publications.
32. As much as some may want metrics to go away entirely, that Genie is already out of the bottle and won‘t go back in.
37. Journal X IF 2008= All citations from Thomsons Reuters journals in 2008 to papers in journal X Number of citable articles published in journal X in 2006/7
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45. www.mendeley.com www.zotero.org connotea.org www.mekentosj.com hubmed.org Re-couple metadata that has be de-coupled from data www.2collab.com www.refworks.com “ iTunes for PDF files”
46.
47.
48. “ Your article was published in a journal with an Impact Factor of X” Peter Binfield