| PLoS ALMs与Altmetrics评分、单篇论文学术评价指标的比较分析 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 程晶晶,王宇璐,陈小清.PLoS ALMs与Altmetrics评分、单篇论文学术评价指标的比较分析[J].中华医学图书情报杂志,2018,27(2):26-33. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 程晶晶 王宇璐 陈小清 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 浙江大学医学院附属妇产科医院，浙江 杭州 310006,浙江大学医学院附属妇产科医院，浙江 杭州 310006,浙江大学医学院附属第一医院图书馆，浙江杭州 310003 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目的:比较分析PLoS ALMs与Altmetrics评分、单篇论文学术评价指标之间的相关性及对单篇论文的评价效度。方法:以PLoS系列期刊PLoS Biology、PLoS Medicine为例，基于PLoS ALMs论文层面计量指标数据，分析比较其阅览量、下载量、讨论量、保存量、被引频次、推荐量与Altmetrics评分、h指数、学术迹T之间的相关性以及对单篇论文的评价效果。结果:阅览量、下载量、讨论量与被引频次、h指数有正相关性，推荐量与h指数、学术迹无关。Altmetrics评分与阅览量、下载量和讨论量呈中度相关性，与被引频次呈弱相关。结论:PLoS ALMs是一个多维评价，应该应用多指标测度，才能体现研究成果的综合实力。
|
| 关 键 词： | PLoSALMs 论文层面计量学 Altmetrics评分 被引频次 h指数 学术迹 |
| 收稿时间： | 2018/1/15 0:00:00 |
Comparative analysis of PLoS ALMS and ALtmetrics scores and indications for assessing the academic level of individual articles |
| |
| CHENG Jing-jing,WANG YU-lu and CHEN Xiao-qing.Comparative analysis of PLoS ALMS and ALtmetrics scores and indications for assessing the academic level of individual articles[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Library and Information Science,2018,27(2):26-33. |
| |
| Authors: | CHENG Jing-jing WANG YU-lu and CHEN Xiao-qing |
| |
| Institution: | Women''s Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China,Women''s Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China and Library of First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Objective To comparatively analyze the the relationship between PLoS ALMs, Altmetrics score and the indications for assessing the academic level of individual articles and their efficiency for assessing the academic level of individual articles.Methods The relationship of the viewed, downloaded, discussed, recommended counts and frequency of citation with Altmetrics score, h index, academic track T and their efficiency for assessing a single paper were comparatively analyzed with PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine as an example.Results The viewed, downloaded and discussed papers were positively related with the frequency of citation and h index, the recommended papers were not related with the h index and academic track T, and the Altmetrics score was moderately related with the red, downloaded and discussed papers, and was weakly related with the frequency of citation. Conclusion PLoS ALMS is a multidimensional assessment. Only it is measured with several indications, can it demonstrate a work''s comprehensive strength. |
| |
| Keywords: | PLoS ALMS ALMS Altmetrics score Frequency of citation h index Academic tract T |
|
| 点击此处可从《中华医学图书情报杂志》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《中华医学图书情报杂志》下载免费的PDF全文 |
