A critical evaluation of the algorithm behind the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR)

Janssens, A. Cecile J.W.; Goodman, Michael; Powell, Kimberly R.; Gwinn, Marta

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2002536

Cited by 37 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A paper with an RCR of 1.0 has received the same number of citations per year as the median NIH‐funded paper in its field, whereas a paper with an RCR of 2.0 has received twice as many citations per year as the median NIH‐funded paper in its field. The weighted RCR is the sum of the RCRs for the articles within the analysis group for a given author …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gender disparities are present in academic rank and leadership positions despite overall equivalence in research productivity indices among senior members of American Head and Neck Society (AHNS) Fellowship Faculty

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aims to examine potential disparities in scholarly performance based on sex, academic rank, leadership positions, and regional distribution of faculty in accredited Head and Neck Surgery fellowships in the United States. Methods Online faculty listings for 37 accredited fellowships were organized according to academic rank, leadership position, sex, and institutional location. Academic productivity was measured with three bibliometric indices: h‐index, m‐index, and the weighted relative citation ratio. Results A total of 732 faculty members were included, of which 153 (21%) were female. Fifty‐eight males (89.2%) held leadership positions, compared to seven females (10.8%). There was no significant difference in overall productivity between male and female senior faculty. There were regional differences in productivity by sex. Conclusions Females are underrepresented in senior faculty and within three common leadership positions, although scholarly productivity for male and female senior faculty and for those in leadership positions is similar.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The weighted RCR is the sum of the RCRs for the articles within the analysis group for a given author. 21 All statistical calculations were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics Software, version 20.0. Data were collected in September 2017 and October 2017.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender disparities are present in academic rank and leadership positions despite overall equivalence in research productivity indices among senior members of American Head and Neck Society (AHNS) Fellowship Faculty

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For cited-side normalization, this is the case of the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR), the articles co-cited with the focal article are utilized in the generation of the reference set that represents the field of the focal article [20]. However, this RCR has been criticized [21]. In this sense, we think our metric could be used in a new methodology for cited-side normalization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdisciplinarity Metric Based on the Co-Citation Network

Hernández

Dorta-González

2020

Mathematics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantifying the interdisciplinarity of a research is a relevant problem in the evaluative bibliometrics. The concept of interdisciplinarity is ambiguous and multidimensional. Thus, different measures of interdisciplinarity have been propose in the literature. However, few studies have proposed interdisciplinary metrics without previously defining classification sets, and no one has used the co-citation network for this purpose. In this study we propose an interdisciplinary metric based on the co-citation network. This is a way to define the publication’s field without resorting to pre-defined classification sets. We present a characterization of a publication’s field and then we use this definition to propose a new metric of the interdisciplinarity degree for publications (papers) and journals as units of analysis. The proposed measure has an aggregative property that makes it scalable from a paper individually to a set of them (journal) without more than adding the numerators and denominators in the proportions that define this new indicator. Moreover, the aggregated value of two or more units is strictly among all the individual values.

show abstract

“…It seems that the indicator will be used in research evaluation (see https://icite.od.nih.gov), despite critical comments in the literature (Bornmann & Haunschild, 2017;Janssens, Goodman, Powell, & Gwinn, 2017;Waltman, 2015). indicator that is used everywhere, researchers will have a strong incentive to try to game this indicator (Rijcke, Wouters, Rushforth, Franssen, & Hammarfelt, 2016 With our appeal for standardization, we follow earlier initiatives in scientometrics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical rationalism and the search for standard (field-normalized) indicators in bibliometrics

Bornmann

Marx

2018

Journal of Informetrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bibliometrics plays an increasingly important role in research evaluation. However, no gold standard exists for a set of reliable and valid (field-normalized) impact indicators in research evaluation. This opinion paper recommends that bibliometricians develop and analyze these impact indicators against the backdrop of Popper's critical rationalism. The studies critically investigating the indicators should publish the results in such a way that they can be included in meta-analyses. The results of meta-analyses give guidance on which indicators can then be part of a set of indicators used as standard in bibliometrics. The generation and continuous revision of the standard set could be handled by the International Society for Informetrics and Scientometrics (ISSI).

show abstract

A critical evaluation of the algorithm behind the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR)

Cited by 37 publications

References 9 publications

Gender disparities are present in academic rank and leadership positions despite overall equivalence in research productivity indices among senior members of American Head and Neck Society (AHNS) Fellowship Faculty

Gender disparities are present in academic rank and leadership positions despite overall equivalence in research productivity indices among senior members of American Head and Neck Society (AHNS) Fellowship Faculty

Interdisciplinarity Metric Based on the Co-Citation Network

Critical rationalism and the search for standard (field-normalized) indicators in bibliometrics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About