Supporting biomedical research and evaluation: bibliometrics for information specialists
Abstract
Supporting research is one of the most important tasks for biomedical librarians and information specialists. This support can be offered in several ways. Libraries are responsible for acess to information, covered by the more traditional activities as Resources Purchases and Subscriptions Management, Document Supply and Interlibrary Loan Services, or Reference Service. Moreover, Libraries can assist researchers on their needs related to the assessment and evaluation of their scientific research.The aim of the EAHIL workshop session on Bibliometrics was to introduce biomedical librarians to the fundamentals of this discipline and to provide them with tools, techniques and methodologies on this subject in order to improve their services.
References
1. Björneborn L, Ingwersen P. Toward a basic
framework for webometrics. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and
Technology. 2004;55(14):1216-27.
doi: 10.1002/asi.20077
2. Pritchard A. Statistical bibliography or
bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation.
1969;25(4):348-9.
3. Garfield E. Citation Indexes for Science: A New
Dimension in Documentation through
Association of Ideas. Science.
1955;122(3159):108-11.
doi: 10.1126/science.122.3159.108.
4. Franceschet M. Ten good reasons to use the
Eigenfactor™ metrics. Information Processing &
Management. 2010;46(5):555-8.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2010.01.001.
5. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the
journal impact factor. JAMA. 2006;295(1):90-3.
doi: 10.1001/jama.295.1.90.
6. Egghe L. Theory and practise of the g-index.
Scientometrics. 2006;69(1):131-52.
doi: 10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7.
7. Hicks D, Wouters P, Waltman L, de Rijcke S,
Rafols I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for
research metrics. Nature. 2015;520(7548):429-
31. doi: 10.1038/520429a. PubMed PMID:
25903611.
framework for webometrics. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and
Technology. 2004;55(14):1216-27.
doi: 10.1002/asi.20077
2. Pritchard A. Statistical bibliography or
bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation.
1969;25(4):348-9.
3. Garfield E. Citation Indexes for Science: A New
Dimension in Documentation through
Association of Ideas. Science.
1955;122(3159):108-11.
doi: 10.1126/science.122.3159.108.
4. Franceschet M. Ten good reasons to use the
Eigenfactor™ metrics. Information Processing &
Management. 2010;46(5):555-8.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2010.01.001.
5. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the
journal impact factor. JAMA. 2006;295(1):90-3.
doi: 10.1001/jama.295.1.90.
6. Egghe L. Theory and practise of the g-index.
Scientometrics. 2006;69(1):131-52.
doi: 10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7.
7. Hicks D, Wouters P, Waltman L, de Rijcke S,
Rafols I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for
research metrics. Nature. 2015;520(7548):429-
31. doi: 10.1038/520429a. PubMed PMID:
25903611.
Published
2016-03-11
How to Cite
1.
Gómez A. Supporting biomedical research and evaluation: bibliometrics for information specialists. JEAHIL [Internet]. 11Mar.2016 [cited 26Apr.2024];11(3). Available from: http://ojs.eahil.eu/ojs/index.php/JEAHIL/article/view/62
Issue
Section
Workshop Report
JEAHIL is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence, unless otherwise stated. Please read our Policies page for more information on Open Access, copyright and permissions.
