Bibliometric Analysis in the Dental Sciences

INTRODUCTION.
Fast generation of knowledge makes the need for measurement tools such as bibliometric analysis essential. Such tools are exercises for the efficient development of research, characterizing the scientific output of individuals, institutions, and countries from a qualitative and quantitative point of view, minimizing the subjectivity inherent to the indexing of knowledge in a particular field of science(1). However, so far there are no universally accepted methodologies(2) and comprehensive analysis including peer review implies great complexity, hence costs, and some degree of subjectivity that impedes the achievement of a holistic and objective view of the scenario(1, 3).
With these evaluations we compare realities and identify strengths/weaknesses, potential/consolidated, dispersed/concentrated research areas, which can be oriented to prioritize researchers, groups, lines of research, etc., through resource allocation beyond quality that promises a project (1, 4).
The two most important indicators in these evaluations are productivity, total number of articles published, and impact factor (IF), as introduced by Garfield(2) – the ratio between citations in a given year, the articles published during the previous two years, and the total number of such articles(4, 5). Another relevant indicator is the h-index(6), which synthesizes productivity and IF into one value(7).
But not all publications or citations are considered in these analyses. Currently, main consideration is given to those indexed in two databases especially designed for this purpose: the most known and well used is Thomson Reuters (formerly ISI), although in recent years the use of Scopus (Elsevier) has grown due to its greater inclusivity and r...

... middle of paper ...

...ientometrics perspective. Scientometrics 2013; 94: 615-28.
11.- Abramo G, Ciriaco A, Solazzo M. The relationship between scientists’ research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research. Scientometrics 2011; 86: 629-43.
12.- Manterola C, Pineda V, Vial M, Losada H. What is the methodologic quality of human therapy studies in ISI surgical publications? Ann Surg. 2006; 244: 827–32.
13.- Sharma S, Thomas VJ. Inter-country R&D efficiency analysis: An application of data envelopment analysis. Scientometrics 2008; 76: 483-501.
14.- Wang J. Citation time window choice for research impact. Scientometrics 2013; 94: 851-72.
15.- Krauskopf E. Standardization of the institutional address. Scientometrics. 2013; 94: 1313-5.
16.- Derrick G, Sturk H, Haynes A, Chapman S, Hall W. A cautionary bibliometric tale of two cities. Scientometrics 2010; 84: 317-320.