• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.27-41
• /
• 2013

We investigated how bibliometric indicators such as publication count and citation count affect the assessment of research performance by computing various bibliometric scores of the works of Korean LIS faculty members and comparing the rankings by those scores. For the study data, we used the publication and citation data of 159 tenure-track faculty members of Library and Information Science departments in 34 Korean universities. The study results showed correlation between publication count and citation count for authors with many publications but the opposite evidence for authors with few publications. The study results suggest that as authors publish more and more work, citations to their work tend to increase along with publication count. However, for junior faculty members who have not yet accumulated enough publications, citations to their work are of great importance in assessing their research performance. The study data also showed that there are marked differences in the magnitude of citations between papers published in Korean journals and papers published in international journals.

• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.287-304
• /
• 2016

This paper introduces a new bibliometric measure called Quality Factor, which assesses multiple facets of faculty research performance. The computation of Quality factor is based on a combination of publication count, citation count, h-index, and Impact Factor. In order to analyze the relationship between Quality Factor and other bibliometric measures (publication count, citation count, h-index, g-index, Impact Factor), the study collected publication data of 189 Korean Library and Information Science professors from 2001 to 2014 to produce the rankings of the faculty by each bibliometric measure and computed Spearman's rank correlations between the rankings. The overall results showed Quality Factor to be correlated to citation-driven measures (citation count, h-index, g-index), but the scatterplot as well as rank-interval analysis showed Quality Factor to be distinctive and more discriminating than other measures.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.37-66
• /
• 2023

Scientometrics and research evaluation describe and analyze research publications when conducting publication, citation, and topic analyses. However, what exactly is a (scientific, academic, scholarly or research) publication? This article demonstrates that there are many problems when it comes to looking in detail at quantitative publication analyses, citation analyses, altmetric analyses, and topic analyses. When is a document a publication and when is it not? We discuss authorship and contribution, formally and informally published documents, as well as documents in between (preprints, research data) and the characteristics of references, citations, and topics. What is a research publication? Is there a commonly accepted criterion for distinguishing between research and non-research? How complete and unbiased are data sources for research publications and sources for altmetrics? What is one research publication? What is the unit of a publication that causes us to count it as "1?" In this regard, we report problems related to multi-author publications and their counting, weighted document types, the unit and weighting of citations and references, the unit of topics, and counting problems-not only at the article and individual researcher level (micro-level), but also at the meso-level (e.g., institutions) and macro-level (e.g., countries). Our results suggest that scientometric counting units are not reliable and clear. Many scientometric and research evaluation studies must therefore be used with the utmost caution.

• Hip & pelvis
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.87-95
• /
• 2022

Purpose: The aim of this study is to identify highly cited articles and examine trends and characteristics in research on periacetabular osteotomy. Materials and Methods: The 50 most highly cited articles on periacetabular osteotomy research were identified using Scopus. Data regarding article demographics and publication were collected from each article and an analysis was performed. Results: The mean citation count was 125±37. The article with the highest total citation count (796), five-year citation count (327), and five-year citation density (65/year) was reported by Reinhold Ganz. The five-year citation density showed strong correlation with total citation density (r=0.930, P<0.001). Reinhold Ganz, the most productive author, was listed on 13 articles in the cohort with 455 weighted citation points. Conclusion: This study provides a collection of articles examining periacetabular osteotomies and demonstrates that citation count can be regarded as an acceptable measure of the contemporary academic influence of an article.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.71-96
• /
• 2008

Letters of Credit are the most common method of payment for goods in the export trade, and banking practice relating to letters of credit is standardised by the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, which are a set of rules issued by the International Chamber of Commerce. The current version is UCP 600, which took effect on July 1, 2007. To assist the practitioners of Documentary Credits, the KCCI(Koea Chamber of Commerce and Industry) authorised a new publication-Official Commentary on UCP 600. This new publication added the word "official" in the title. In order to being an official commentary, the terms and expression should be correct and unified. But there is some problems in official commentary and legal phraseology. The problem was appeared that ICC UCP 600's were translated into Korean UCP 600 version. For example, "Issuing Bank", "Applicant", "Port of discharge", "A date of pick-up", "Shipper's load and count", "Courier Receipt", "Charter Party", "Bill of Lading", "Cover Note", "Exclusion Clause", "Insurance Certificate", "Declaration, Underwriter". If can be used 'Official Commentary on UCP 600', the above statements should be a compliment though take a wide professional opinions or held a public hearings. The Purpose of this paper is to point out the problems and substitute the term used and unify the expression in official commentary.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.67 no.1
• /
• pp.50-59
• /
• 2024

Objective : This study aimed to conduct a bibliometric analysis on pelvic parameter related research over the last 30 years, analyzing trends, hotspots, and influential works within this field. Methods : A comprehensive Web of Science database search was performed. The search yielded 3249 results, focusing on articles and reviews published from 1992 to 2022 in English. Data was analyzed using CiteSpace and VOSviewer for keyword, authorship, and citation burst analysis, co-citation analysis, and clustering. Results : The number of publications and citations related to pelvic parameters has increased exponentially over the last 30 years. The USA leads in publication count with 1003 articles. Top publishing journals include the European Spine Journal, Spine, and Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, with significant contributions by Schwab, Lafage V, and Protoptaltis. The most influential articles were identified using centrality and sigma values, indicating their role as key articles within the field. Research hotspots included spinal deformity, total hip arthroplasty, and sagittal alignment. Conclusion : Interest in pelvic parameter related research has grown significantly over the last three decades, indicating its relevance in modern orthopedics. The most influential works within this field have contributed to our understanding of spinal deformity, pelvic incidence, and their relation to total hip arthroplasty. This study provides a comprehensive overview of the trends and influential research in the field of pelvic parameters.

• Proceedings of the Korea Water Resources Association Conference
• /
• 2022.05a
• /
• pp.145-145
• /
• 2022

Availability of abundant water resources data in developing countries is a great concern that has hindered the adoption of deep learning techniques (DL) for disaster prevention and mitigation. On the contrary, over the last two decades, a sizeable amount of DL publication in disaster management emanated from developed countries with efficient data management systems. To understand the current state of DL adoption for solving water-related disaster management in developing countries, an extensive bibliometric review coupled with a theory-based analysis of related research documents is conducted from 2003 - 2022 using Web of Science, Scopus, VOSviewer software and PRISMA model. Results show that four major disasters - pluvial / fluvial flooding, land subsidence, drought and snow avalanche are the most prevalent. Also, recurrent flash floods and landslides caused by irregular rainfall pattern, abundant freshwater and mountainous terrains made India the only developing country with an impressive DL adoption rate of 50% publication count, thereby setting the pace for other developing countries. Further analysis indicates that economically-disadvantaged countries will experience a delay in DL implementation based on their Human Development Index (HDI) because DL implementation is capital-intensive. COVID-19 among other factors is identified as a driver of DL. Although, the Long Short Term Model (LSTM) model is the most frequently used, but optimal model performance is not limited to a certain model. Each DL model performs based on defined modelling objectives. Furthermore, effect of input data size shows no clear relationship with model performance while final model deployment in solving disaster problems in real-life scenarios is lacking. Therefore, data augmentation and transfer learning are recommended to solve data management problems. Intensive research, training, innovation, deployment using cheap web-based servers, APIs and nature-based solutions are encouraged to enhance disaster preparedness.

• International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.17-34
• /
• 2022

This informetrics study was conducted to find out the distribution of articles and authors that published in African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Studies [AJLAIS]) from 2009 to 2018; considering the year-wise growth of research articles; authorship pattern and collaboration ratio; subject and geographical distributions of authors; and authors' productivity level. A descriptive informetrics research design was adopted. Quota sampling technique was used to select all the articles published within the ten-year period. Data collected through a self-designed checklist was analyzed using frequency count and percentage. The findings revealed that 141 articles, contributed by 266 authors were published by AJLAIS during the period. An annual average growth of 1.20% was recorded. Overall year-wise authorship pattern revealed that majority of articles (62.41%) published in AJLAIS were multiple authored. Also, articles on Informetrics and ICT dominated the journal. Some subject areas not covered were identified such as: indexing and serial collections management. Average collaborative index across the 10-year period for the journal was 0.62. South Africa and Nigeria were the two major prolific contributors to AJLAIS, just as evidence-based research papers of survey type (65.25%) were the most common to the journal. There should be increased numbers of articles in each edition over the coming years, and awareness should be created by the publishers to familiarize the researchers with the publishing requirements of the journal. Also, LIS researchers should concentrate more on areas usually left untouched by previous studies. The study is original as no other similar study was found on publication pattern of articles in AJLAIS covering a ten year period of 2009-2018. The findings of the study will also serve as a feedback mechanism for the Publisher of the Journal and LIS researchers on how to improve the journal and LIS research in general.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.49 no.4
• /
• pp.241-264
• /
• 2015

Bibliometric analysis for research performance evaluation can generate erroneous assessments for various reasons. Application of the same evaluation metric to different domains, for instance, can produce unfair evaluation results, while analysis based on incomplete data can lead to incorrect conclusions. This study examines bibliometric data of library and information science (LIS) research in Korea to investigate whether research performance should be evaluated in a uniform manner in multi-disciplinary fields such as LIS and how data incompleteness can affect the bibliometric assessment outcomes. The initial analysis of our study data, which consisted of 4,350 citations to 1,986 domestic papers published between 2001 and 2010 by 163 LIS faculty members in Korea, showed an anomalous citation pattern caused by data incompleteness, which was addressed via data projection based on past citation trends. The subsequent analysis of augmented study data revealed ample evidence of bibliometric pattern differences across subject areas. In addition to highlighting the need for a subject-specific assessment of research performance, the study demonstrated the importance of rigorous analysis and careful interpretation of bibliometric data by identifying and compensating for deficiencies in the data source, examining per capita as well as overall statistics, and considering various facets of research in order to interpret what the numbers reflect rather than merely taking them at face value as quantitative measures of research performance.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• v.6 no.4
• /
• pp.6-16
• /
• 2018

This article shows an approach to the study of two fundamental aspects of the prepublication of scientific manuscripts in specialized repositories (arXiv). The first refers to the size of the interaction of "standard papers" in journals appearing in the Web of Science (WoS)-now Clarivate Analytics-and "non-standard papers" (manuscripts appearing in arXiv). Specifically, we analyze the citations found in the WoS to articles in arXiv. The second aspect is how publication in arXiv affects the citation count of authors. The question is whether or not prepublishing in arXiv benefits authors from the point of view of increasing their citations, or rather produces a dispersion, which would diminish the relevance of their publications in evaluation processes. Data have been collected from arXiv, the websites of the journals, Google Scholar, and WoS following a specific ad hoc procedure. The number of citations in journal articles published in WoS to preprints in arXiv is not large. We show that citation counts from regular papers and preprints using different sources (arXiv, the journal's website, WoS) give completely different results. This suggests a rather scattered picture of citations that could distort the citation count of a given article against the author's interest. However, the number of WoS references to arXiv preprints is small, minimizing this potential negative effect.