H-index, mentoring-index, highly-cited and highly-accessed: how to evaluate scientists?
2008
Evaluating Scientists: H-index and Mentoring
Editorial
Author Information
Author(s): Jeang Kuan-Teh
Primary Institution: The National Institutes of Health
Hypothesis
How can we effectively evaluate scientists within a peer group?
Conclusion
The H-index and total citations are useful measures for evaluating scientific productivity, but a mentoring index could also be important.
Supporting Evidence
- The H-index correlates well with the frequency that published papers are cited.
- Older scientists typically have higher H-index numbers than younger ones.
- High readership does not always require high citation frequency.
Takeaway
Scientists can be evaluated by how many times they are cited and how often their papers are read, but we should also think about how well they mentor others.
Methodology
The editorial discusses various metrics for evaluating scientists, including the H-index and citation frequencies.
Limitations
Different databases measure H-index numbers over varying time periods, making comparisons difficult.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website