Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Feb;1(1):45-52.
doi: 10.1017/cts.2016.8. Epub 2017 Jan 31.

Feasibility of common bibliometrics in evaluating translational science

M Schneider  1 , C M Kane  2 , J Rainwater  3 , L Guerrero  4   5 , G Tong  6 , S R Desai  7 , W Trochim  2
Affiliations

Feasibility of common bibliometrics in evaluating translational science

M Schneider et al. J Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Feb.

Abstract

Introduction: A pilot study by 6 Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) explored how bibliometrics can be used to assess research influence.

Methods: Evaluators from 6 institutions shared data on publications (4202 total) they supported, and conducted a combined analysis with state-of-the-art tools. This paper presents selected results based on the tools from 2 widely used vendors for bibliometrics: Thomson Reuters and Elsevier.

Results: Both vendors located a high percentage of publications within their proprietary databases (>90%) and provided similar but not equivalent bibliometrics for estimating productivity (number of publications) and influence (citation rates, percentage of papers in the top 10% of citations, observed citations relative to expected citations). A recently available bibliometric from the National Institutes of Health Office of Portfolio Analysis, examined after the initial analysis, showed tremendous potential for use in the CTSA context.

Conclusion: Despite challenges in making cross-CTSA comparisons, bibliometrics can enhance our understanding of the value of CTSA-supported clinical and translational research.

Keywords: CTSA; Metrics; Publications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Scholarly output and average cites per paper for Thomson Reuters (TR) and Elsevier: all publications (2007–2013).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Thomson Reuters (TR) and Elsevier (E) scholarly output by institution and project year.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Thomson Reuters Category-C Index (Cat-C Index), Elsevier Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI), and iCite Relative Citation Ratio (RCR) by Year for all publications. The black line at 1.0 shows the expected rate for the respective comparative citation ratios.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. National Institutes of Health. Institutional Clinical and Translational Science Award [Internet] 2008 [cited Mar 18, 2016]. (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-08-002.html)
    1. Dilts DM, Rosenblum D, Trochim WM. A virtual national laboratory for reengineering clinical translational science. Science Translational Medicine 2012; 4: 118cm2. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rubio DM, et al. Developing common metrics for the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs): lessons learned. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8: 451–459. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Trochim WM, et al. Evaluation guidelines for the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs). Clinical and Translational Science 2013; 6: 303–309. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Scott CS, et al. Expanding assessments of translational research programs: supplementing metrics with value judgments. Evaluation & the Health Professions 2014; 37: 83–97. - PMC - PubMed