Arencibia JR

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 215-218
PDF size: 27.24 Kb.

Text Extraction

No abstract.

REFERENCES

1. Fernández Esquinas M. Perspectivas teóricas sobre ciencia, tecnología e innovación. Introducción. ARBOR Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura. 2009;CLXXV:657-61.

2. Moed HF. Citation analysis in research evaluation. Berlin: Springer, 2005.

3. Silva Ayçaguer LC. El Índice-h y Google académico: una simbiosis cienciométrica inclusiva. Acimed. 2012;23(3): En este número.

4. Arencibia Jorge R, Moya Anegón F. Challenges in the study of Cuban scientific output. Scientometrics. 2010;83:723-37.

5. Arencibia Jorge R. Visibilidad Internacional de la Ciencia y Educación Superior Cubanas: desafíos del estudio de la producción científica. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 2011.

6. Van Noorden R. A profusion of measures. Nature. 2010;465:864-6.

7. Núñez Jover J, López Cerezo JA. Technological Innovation as Social Innovation: Science, Technology and the Rise of STS Studies in Cuba. Science Technology and Human Values 2008;33:707-29.

8. Garfield E, Sher IH. New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. American Documentation. 1963;14(3):195-201.

9. Martyn J, Gilchrist A. An evaluation of British scientific journals (Aslib Occasional Publication, no. 1). London: Aslib, 1968.

10. Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science. 1972; 178(4060):4719.

11. Archambault É, Larivière V. History of journal impact factor: contingencies and consequences, Scientometrics. 2009;79(3):639-53.

12. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be use for evaluating research. British Medical Journal. 1977;314:497-507.

13. Moed HF, Van Leeuwen TN. Improving the accuracy of Institute for Scientific Informations journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1995;46(6):461-7.

14. Glänzel W, Moed HF. Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics. 2002;53(2):171-93.

15. Aréchaga JM. Las revistas profesionales como claves para el desarrollo de la ciencia, la medicina y la tecnología en España. Panace@. 2005;4(19).

16. Rossner M, Van Epps H, Hill E. Show me the data. J Cell Biol. 2007;179(6): 10911092.

17. Smith R. Journal accused of manipulating impact factor. British Medical Journal. 1997;314(7079):463.

18. Metze K. Bureaucrats, researchers, editors, and the impact factor - a vicious circle that is detrimental to science. Clinics. 2010;65(10):937-40.

19. Hernán MA. Epidemiologists (of all people) should question journal impact factors. Epidemiology. 2008;19:3668.

20. PLoS Medicine Editors. The impact factor game: It is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature. PLoS Medicine; 2006:3:291.