ResearchGate Score Research Articles

Indexing of Journals and Indices of Publications.

Journal indexes are indicators toward the quality of a journal. Authors, researchers, and the audience need some criteria to judge which literature they need to read or which journal they need to send their article to. Journal indexes help the respective groups to make this decision. From Index Medicus to Web of Science, journal indexes use different criteria to judge the quality of a journal or an article. Figures like impact factor and CiteScore also rank journals and articles based on various criteria so that the audience and authors can make their pick. Author indices like h-index and ResearchGate score aid in comparing scientific work done by authors and researchers. Indexes of journals, publications, and authors therefore offer a classification of medical literature from which the best can be chosen depending on the requirements in their respective fields.

Metric comparison between Google Scholar and Research Gate for rated scientists in South Africa

The successful promotion of an academic at an institution of higher learning is affected, to a large degree, by the publication record of the applicant. This record is usually updated in a resume, portfolio, or an online database, such as Google Scholar, Research Gate, or LinkedIn. The purpose of this article is to present a metric comparison between Google Scholar and Research Gate for rated scientists who are employed at universities of technology in South Africa. This may help to establish notable similarities or differences between rated scientists from specific universities and identify which platform they prefer to maintain their publication records. A snapshot quantitative study is used where the total number of citations, h-index values, and Research Gate scores were collected and analyzed. Results indicate that Research Gate has the highest number of authors present from the six universities of technology, with Google Scholar recording the highest number of h-index values for these authors. Only 134 out of the 181 (sample size) authors maintain their records on both databases. It is recommended that researchers in higher education use at least one online database to maintain a record of their publications, thereby enhancing the visibility of the research done at a university and enabling a more valid snapshot of the performance achieved by each researcher.

Reflection on ResearchGate’s Terminating ResearchGate Score, and Interest Score, as Social Media Altmetrics and Academic Evaluation Tools

ResearchGate (RG) is a popular academic social media networking platform for scientists, researchers, or academics (SRAs). RG automatically provides a metric, the RG Score, to each RG account holder that serves as a measure of that SRA’s “academic” worth, productivity, and interaction with other SRAs. In 2017, this metric was described by RG as “the RG Score takes all your research and turns it into a source of reputation,” indicating that “it is calculated based on the research in your profile and how other researchers interact with your content.” However, the precise manner in which the RG Score is calculated was never made public because it is a proprietary algorithm, and requests to RG to disclose details of the equations used to calculate it were not met. Not unsurprisingly, RG announced that it would be phasing out the RG Score in June 2022. This article examines what is known in the literature about the RG Score, which may be perceived as a skewed metric because it may add excessive weighting to select aspects, such as questions and answers, rather than to the published literature of an SRA. The RG Interest Score is also critiqued. An author-based metric such as the RG Score that reflects a realistic balance between the most important academic factors while downplaying fairly redundant aspects such as the volume of answers might benefit SRAs. As for any metric, the RG Score should not be used in isolation, be gamed, or used as the basis of any financial remuneration schemes.

The Author-Level Metrics Study: An Analysis of the Traditional and Alternative Metrics of Scholarly Impact for Neurosurgical Authors.

Background and objectiveThere is a paucity of information regarding the concordance of traditional metrics across publicly searchable databases and about the correlation between alternative and traditional metrics for neurosurgical authors. In this study, we aimed to assess the congruence between traditional metrics reported across Google Scholar (GS), Scopus (Sc), and ResearchGate (RG). We also aimed to establish the mathematical correlation between traditional metrics and alternative metrics provided by ResearchGate.MethodsAuthor names listed on papers published in the Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS) in 2019 were collated. Traditional metrics [number of publications (NP), number of citations (NC), and author H-indices (AHi)] and alternative metrics (RG score, Research Interest score, etc. from RG and the GS i10-index) were also collected from publicly searchable author profiles. The concordance between the traditional metrics across the three databases was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman (BA) plots. The mathematical relation between the traditional and alternative metrics was analyzed.ResultsThe AHi showed excellent agreement across the three databases studied. The level of agreement for NP and NC was good at lower median counts. At higher median counts, we found an increase in disagreement, especially for NP. The RG score, number of followers on RG, and Research Interest score independently predicted NC and AHi with a reasonable degree of accuracy.ConclusionsA composite author-level matrix with AHi, RG score, Research Interest score, and the number of RG followers could be used to generate an "Impact Matrix" to describe the scholarly and real-world impact of a clinician’s work.

Research productivity and altmetrics of NIRF top ranked medical institutions

This research aims to identify the state-wise list of active medical institutions in India that participated in the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) ranking (2019-21). A total of 52 institutions were ranked during the three years. However, only 28 of them have remained in the NIRF rankings for all three years. The research performance of these 28 institutions was examined based on their publications indexed in Scopus, Pubmed, and ResearchGate (RG). In addition, the membership registration details, altmetric such as reads, and RG scores were retrieved from ResearchGate. Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was employed in the retrieved data to identify the growth rate. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi is in the top position based on NIRF as well as ResearchGate Scores. SRM Institute of Science and Technology tops in NIRF score growth rate (6.50%) and Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences is leading in ResearchGate score growth rate (55.41%). Kasturba Medical College, (Manipal and Mangaluru) and St. John's Medical College do not have contributions in ResearchGate. The overall publication growth rate of these 28 institutions put together is high for PubMed (13.08%) followed by Scopus (10.06%) and ResearchGate (8.77%). The study recommends that the institutions may encourage their faculty members to make their published research works available in ResearchGate to in order to boost the institution’s visibility.

Academic social networks metrics: an effective indicator for university performance?

Social networks have become popular among researchers and scientists. Specialized platforms for researchers offer many metrics and indicators which are used to evaluate various scientists and assess the strength of their impact. In this article the authors perform systematic comparison between the main university level ResearchGate (RG) metrics: total RG Score, number of publications, number of affiliated profiles and ARWU. A tool for acquiring the RG metrics of research units and a framework for calculating alternative university ranks was implemented and tested. As a point of reference the ranking system of the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU, 2019) was used. The authors used a web scraping technique to acquire data. Data analysis was based on Spearman's rho and multiple linear regression (MLR). Ten additional ranks were developed and compared with the benchmark ranking. The k-means clustering method was used to identify the groups of ARWU universities. The research results show that the metrics provided by specialized social networks can be used for the assessment of universities, however, an in-depth evaluation requires a more advanced procedure and indicators to measure many areas of scholarly activity like research, integration, application, teaching, and co-creation. Clustering method showed also that the distance between the ARWU universities measured in values of RG metrics are bigger for the top of the ranking. The university authorities should encourage researchers to use specialized social networks, and train them how to do it, to promote not only their own achievements, but also to increase the impact and recognition of their respective research units. At the end of the article some limitations of the method used and some practical recommendations for the university authorities were formulated.

An Informetric Analysis of Relationship between Open Access Presence and Ranking of African Universities

This study was conducted to determine the relationship between open access presence and ranking of African universities. It adopted descriptive informetric to examine open access presence of African countries using Directory of Open Access Repositories (DOAR) and Research Gate scores (RGs) of the universities. Data was also extracted from the Journal Consortium (an African university ranking organisation) for metrics on African university ranking. Data on African open access presence was correlated with university rankings. Findings reveal that only twenty-four countries in Africa have records in DOAR and Research gate. Four of the countries (South Africa, Egypt, Kenya and Nigeria) contribute more over 85% of open access records in Africa and the same produced 68% of the top 100 universities in Africa. The study found a highly significant positive but moderate correlation between open access presence and ranking of African universities. It concludes that African universities need to review their science policy in line with open access initiative to enhance the visibility and ranking of the university globally.

ResearchGate, a Scientific Social Network, which Is Working as Growing Database and Cannot be Ignored neither Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons nor Publishers

ResearchGate (RG) was launched in May 2008 by two physicians (Ijad Madisch and Sören Hofmayer) and computer scientist Horst Fickenscher as a social network platform for scientists, which is counting 20 million users.2 RG is also named as networked socio-technical system for scholarly communication3, academic social network site3, and academic social network site4. Citations, reads, RG Score, h-index, comments, personal communication via the platform and much more functions of RG are so impressive for every author. Moreover, the collection of articles` titles and abstracts/summaries with a “search” option made RG a new sophisticated database. The principles of RG are helping to increase the dissemination of practical orientated science like the oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS). In RG`s we can find the articles from open access OMS journals like Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons,5,6 Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Cases,7,8 etc. RG option “Citations” is more than useful for editorial offices and publishers as it helps to track the citation in the journals included to Scopus. It facilitates monitoring of the implementation/compliance of one of the 14 journal selection criteria for inclusion into Scopus. “Citednes of journal articles in Scopus” is important criteria from a category Journal Standing.9 Citation of the articles published in our journal is easy to track with the RG. For example: the article of Le et al10,11 was cited at June 16, 2021 by Weyh et al12,13 published in Atlas of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics. In summary, although discussions about the operation of the ResearchGate exist,14 the benefits of this growing platform as a database should not be underestimated.

ResearchGate Altmetric scores and Scopus bibliometric indicators among lecturers

PurposeMany researchers in ResearchGate (RG) engage in scholarly activity and share research findings. The researchers' activities in this social network may increase the probability of their works being cited. Thus, this study aims to examine the status of RG indices and the Scopus citation indicators of the allied medical sciences lecturers and their association with their academic rankings.Design/methodology/approachA cross-sectional, descriptive analytical study was performed. As a first step, the names of all 50 lecturers at the School of Allied Medical Sciences were searched through RG to find all the lecturers with profiles. Then, the h-index as well as the number of citations by them were extracted from Scopus. Spearman's correlation coefficient test was performed to explore the association of the RG score with the Scopus citation indicators and the academic rankings of the lecturers.FindingsThe findings demonstrated that there is a statistically significant relationship between the RG indices (except the question and answer indices) and the Scopus citation indicators with the academic rankings of the lecturers (p-value < 0.01).Originality/valueKnowledge of the significant relationship between the RG indices and the Scopus citation indicators may encourage the lecturers to make more efforts to be active on RG. Furthermore, policymakers can encourage their researchers and lecturers to be more active in this scientific social network, which could lead to promoting the university rankings in the global and national rankings systems.

Scientific impact of Iran University of Medical Sciences researchers in ResearchGate, Google Scholar, and Scopus: An altmetrics study.

Background: The emergence of web 2.0 and development of social media have strongly affected sharing, collaborating, connecting, and evaluating in academic setting. This study aimed to provide a clear image of faculty members’ activities at Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) and the way they communicate with the academic world in ResearchGate (RG). Methods: In this altmetrics study, we surveyed the presence and activity of IUMS faculty members in RG and compared the data with those derived from Google Scholar and Scopus. The Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to detect the correlation between RG variables and the 2 mentioned databases. The significance level was set at α = 0.01. Data were statistically analyzed using the Microsoft Excel 2013 and SPSS 22.0 software. Results: The results demonstrated 439 (45%) faculty members of IUMS had RG profiles, and the School of Medicine with 287 researchers had the largest contribution. Overall, 14 971 documents were shared, 91% of which were journal articles. The average RG score was 15.26 ± 9.28, of which 94% was acquired from publications. This indicates a positive and strong correlation between RG variables and Scopus and Google Scholar indicators, while the RG indicators were more correlated with Google Scholar than Scopus. Conclusion: Due to the essential role of self-archiving in the visibility, citation rate, and creation of further international collaborations, it is recommended that Iranian scholars consider using the Academic Social Networks like RG to enhance their online international contributions.

Proof of surgical publication prowess: prospective observational study of factors associated with surrogate markers of academic reach.

BackgroundIn the UK, general surgery higher surgical trainees (HSTs) must publish at least three peer‐reviewed scientific articles (as first, second or corresponding author) to qualify for certification of completion of training (CCT). This study aimed to identify the factors associated with success in this arena.MethodsDeanery rosters supplemented with data from the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme, PubMed and ResearchGate were used to identify the profiles of consecutive HSTs. Primary outcomes were publication numbers at defined points in higher training (speciality training year (ST) 3–8); secondary outcomes were the Hirsch index and ResearchGate scores.ResultsFifty‐nine consecutive HSTs (24 women, 35 men) were studied. The median publication number was 3 (range 0–30). At least three published articles were obtained by 30 HSTs (51 per cent), with 19 (38 per cent) of 50 HSTs achieving this by ST4 (of whom 15 (79 per cent) had undertaken out of programme for research (OOPR) time) and 24 (80 per cent) by ST6. Thirteen HSTs (22 per cent) (ST3, 6; ST4, 4; ST5, 2; ST8, 1) had yet to publish at the time of writing. OOPR was associated with achieving three publications (24 of 35 (69 per cent) versus 6 of 24 (25 per cent) with no formal research time; P = 0·001), higher overall number of publications (median 6 versus 1 respectively; P < 0·001), higher ResearchGate score (median 23·37 versus 5·27; P < 0·001) and higher Hirsch index (median 3 versus 1; P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, training grade (odds ratio (OR) 1·89, 95 per cent c.i. 0·01 to 3·52; P = 0·045) and OOPR (OR 6·55, 2·04 to 21·04; P = 0·002) were associated with achieving three publications.ConclusionIf CCT credentials are to include publication profiles, HST programmes should incorporate research training in workforce planning.

Complexity-based quality indicators for human and social capital in science and research: the case of Serbian Homeland versus Diaspora

We developed quality indicators model for measuring human and social capital in the scientific and research communities, grounded in the complexity science. The model was implemented in two phases: in the first, we gathered initial data through the questionnaire designed for scientists and researchers; in the second, we fully analyzed all the respondents, according to the model—this included analysis of their CVs, with wider research of their data in all publicly available sources. The research sample included 444 PhD holders, 202 in Homeland and 242 in Diaspora, all of them being of Serbian origin. Among the most significant findings are the facts that Serbian PhDs from its Diaspora, compared with those living in the Homeland, published 4 times more papers, 6 times more in journals with IF; were cited 15 times more, in 14 times more documents; had 13 times higher value of overall IF; had both 5 times higher ResearchGate scores and the h-index values. In achieving all these, they perceived their work in science and research in more entrepreneurial manner and used collaboration strategies: on average, they had 4 times more co-authors than PhDs in the Homeland. On the other hand, PhDs working and living in the Homeland (Serbia) demonstrated higher devotion to the interests of wider communities they belonged to, considered succession planning as more important, and generally felt more afraid of risks that current trends of our civilization, especially regarding the lack of sustainable management, may lead our entire humanity to some form of collapse.

Comparing the Presence of Researchers of Medical Universities of Western Provinces of Iran on ResearchGate and Scopus

The aim of the present study was to compare the presence of researchers of Medical Universities of Western Provinces of Iran (i.e., Kurdistan, Hamadan, Kermanshah, and Ilam) on ResearchGate and Scopus using altmetric approach. This research also aimed to identify the significant difference between the Scopus indicators and the altmetric indicators of ResearchGate. The statistical population of this research consists of the researchers from University of Medical Sciences in Kurdistan, Hamadan, Kermanshah and Ilam with indexed documents in Scopus and affiliated with ResearchGate that were compared and reviewed by the author's work on ResearchGate. According to Scopus, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences had the highest average number of documents, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences has the highest average h-index, and Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences had the highest average citation count. Based on the number of publications, Ilam University of Medical Sciences had the highest average, based on the ResearchGate Score (RG Score), Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences had the highest score and based on the following and followers indicators, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences received the highest score. Increasing the number of documents uploaded on ResearchGate will increase the citations in Scopus and, consequently, the h-index will increase.

Altmetrics as a research specialty (Dimensions, 2005-2018)

The scientific literature on altmetrics published from 2005 to 2018 was analysed. The overall structure of the speciality’s intellectual landscape is depicted through clusters of co-cited references, analysing journal and author co-citations. The 56,936 references cited in the 8,145 papers of all kinds retrieved from the Dimensions bibliographic database were included in the initial dataset used in the analysis. Pathfinder networks were generated with CiteSpace to determine the most prevalent journals and authors in the speciality. Conceptual structures were identified by co-citation clustering and latent semantic analysis. ‘Open knowledge’, ‘altmetric collection’, ‘web indicator’, ‘assessing research’, ‘ResearchGate score’, ‘open data citation advantage’, ‘Google Scholar author citation’, ‘share data’, ‘academic tweet’, ‘Mendeley readership count’ and ‘social media metrics’ were observed to be the lines of research presently favoured by specialists. Statistical indicators were calculated to determine the journals and contributors making the greatest impact.

An Analysis of Research Productivity of Indian Institute of Technology’s (IITs) with Special Reference to ResearchGate

This paper examines the memberships and research contributions of Indian Institute of Technology’s (IITs) in ResearchGate. The data were extracted from ResearchGate website (https://www.researchgate.net) for this study during first week of September 2017. It was found that 18 IITs have contributed and also shared the research information through ResearchGate. Further the data was analyzed by Memberships of Faculties and Research Scholars, Research Contributions, ResearchGate (RG) Scores of IITs. It is found that the Indian Institute of Technology; Bombay has more members (8,439) with 6,320 publications and very less members by the Indian Institute of Technology; Palakkad has 15 members with no publications. It is suggested that Mandi, Gandhinagar, Jodhpur and palakkad IITs should come forwa

Social Media in Neurosurgery: Using ResearchGate

Neurosurgery is a unique field, which would benefit greatly from increased global collaboration, furthering research efforts. ResearchGate is a social media platform geared toward scientists and researchers. This study evaluated the use of ResearchGate for neurosurgical research collaboration and compared the ResearchGate score with more classic bibliometrics. ResearchGate is a unifying social platform that can strengthen global research collaboration (e.g., data sharing) in the neurosurgery community. Publicly available metrics on 3718 neurosurgery clinical faculty and residents in Canada and the United States were obtained from the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Web site. The following metrics were collected: program name, clinician name, sex, attending (yes or no), resident (yes or no), postgraduate year (if resident), and ResearchGate profile (yes or no). ResearchGate score and its components and h index excluding self-citations were collected. Fellows were not included. Of the 3718 total individuals included, 1338 (36.0%) were present on ResearchGate, comprising 181 women (13.5%) and 1157 men (86.5%). Women and men were present in similar proportions (33.8% of women and 36.3% of men) (χ2 [1, N= 3718]= 1.26; P= 0.26). More faculty were present on ResearchGate than residents (62.4%) (χ2 [1, N= 3718]= 11.42; P= 0.001). A strong positive monotonic correlation between h index and ResearchGate score was shown (rs [1292]= 0.93; P < 0.0005). More than 400 international departments were determined. ResearchGate may be a useful platform to increase neurosurgical networking and research collaboration. Its novel bibliometrics are strongly correlated with more classic platforms.

ResearchGate Score, full-text research items, and full-text reads: a follow-up study

This contribution focuses on the scholarly social network ResearchGate (RG). We take the cue from a recent change in the information shown on each researcher’s profile page, which now discloses the number of full-text reads, in addition to the already provided number of overall reads. Building on the findings of two previous studies (Orduna-Malea et al. in Scientometrics 112(1):443–460, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2396-9 ; Copiello and Bonifaci in Scientometrics 114(1):301–306, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2582-9 ), we delve into the relationship among full-text research items uploaded in that platform, full-text reads of the same items, and the so-called RG Score. The dataset examined here provides conflicting results. Firstly, the number of full-text publications and reads is significantly different, along with the RG Score, for the analyzed samples. Secondly, the RG Score implicitly rewards the ratio between the full-texts available to users and total research items. Moreover, the same score seems to be affected to a greater degree by the level of overall reads. However, apart from an indirect relationship, it does not reward how much attention the full-texts get in comparison to the other research items featured in the scholars’ profile pages.

Innovation in the Learning Environment Using Research Gate among Faculty Members of Indian Institute of Management, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu

The present study investigates the impacts of Innovation in learning environment by using research gate among faculty members of the Indian Institute of Management, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India. A creative environment is one that is capable of evolving naturally and adapting as effective tool in management related education and changes, stimulates tremendously in the academic area. The study reveals that the main subjects are the Finance and economics among the researchers. The research gate sufficiently motivates the needed research and learning tools for the faculty members and academic researchers. A country wise top-level reads states India as the 54th elected place of the research gate usage. It is overall total Research Gate scores 129.41. This consists of an Effective collaboration with the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras 9367 Members and Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore 786 members.

Analytic Methods for Quality Control of Scientific Publications Part VI: Presentation in Research Gate, Journal Indexing, and Recognition

In the world of science, recognition of scientific performance is strongly correlated with publication visibility and interest generated among other researchers, which is evident by downloads and citations. A published paper’s number of downloads and citations are the best indices of its importance and are useful measures of the researchers’ performance. However, the published paper should be valuated and indexed independently, and the prestige of the journal in which it is published should not influence the value of the paper itself. By participating in and presenting at congresses and international meetings, scientists strongly increase the visibility of their results and recognition of their research; this also promotes their publications. Status in Research Gate (RG), the so-called RG Score, the Percentile, and the h-index give researchers feedback about their performance, or their place and prestige within the scientific community. RG has become an excellent tool for disseminating scientific results and connecting researchers worldwide. RG also allows researchers to present achievements other than publications (e.g., membership in recognized associations such as the American Chemist Society, a biography in Marquis Who’s Who in the World, awards received, and/or ongoing projects). This paper discusses questions regarding how the RG Score, Percentile, and h-index are calculated, whether these methods are correct, and alternative criteria. RG also lists papers with falsified results and the journals that publish them. Thus, it may be appropriate to reduce the indices for such journals, authors, and the institutions with which these authors are affiliated.

Which US and European Higher Education Institutions are visible in ResearchGate and what affects their RG score?

While ResearchGate has become the most popular academic social networking site in terms of regular users, not all institutions have joined and the scores it assigns to academics and institutions are controversial. This paper assesses the presence in ResearchGate of higher education institutions in Europe and the US in 2017, and the extent to which institutional ResearchGate Scores reflect institutional academic impact. Most of the 2258 European and 4355 US higher educational institutions included in the sample had an institutional ResearchGate profile, with near universal coverage for PhD-awarding institutions found in the Web of Science (WoS). For non-PhD awarding institutions that did not publish, size (number of staff members) was most associated with presence in ResearchGate. For PhD-awarding institutions in WoS, presence in RG was strongly related to the number of WoS publications. In conclusion, a) institutional RG scores reflect research volume more than visibility and b) this indicator is highly correlated to the number of WoS publications. Hence, the value of RG Scores for institutional comparisons is limited.