Abstract:Percentile-based approaches have been proposed as a non-parametric alternative to parametric central-tendency statistics to normalize observed citation counts. Percentiles are based on an ordered set of citation counts in a reference set, whereby the fraction of papers at or below the citation counts of a focal paper is used as an indicator for its relative citation impact in the set. In this study, we pursue two related objectives: (1) although different percentile-based approaches have been developed, an approach is hitherto missing that satisfies a number of criteria such as scaling of the percentile ranks from zero (all other papers perform better) to 100 (all other papers perform worse), and solving the problem with tied citation ranks unambiguously. We introduce a new citation-rank approach having these properties, namely P100. (2) We compare the reliability of P100 empirically with other percentile-based approaches, such as the approaches developed by the SCImago group, the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), and Thomson Reuters (InCites), using all papers published in 1980 in Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS). How accurately can the different approaches predict the long-term citation impact in 2010 (in year 31) using citation impact measured in previous time windows (years 1 to 30)? The comparison of the approaches shows that the method used by InCites overestimates citation impact (because of using the highest percentile rank when papers are assigned to more than a single subject category) whereas the SCImago indicator shows higher power in predicting the long-term citation impact on the basis of citation rates in early years. Since the results show a disadvantage in this predictive ability for P100 against the other approaches, there is still room for further improvements.

On the calculation of percentile-based bibliometric indicators

The Citation-Based Indicator and Combined Impact Indicator-New Options for Measuring Impact

The use of percentiles and percentile rank classes in the analysis of bibliometric data: Opportunities and limits

How much do different ways of calculating percentiles influence the derived performance indicators? - A case study

On the Predictability of Utilizing Rank Percentile to Evaluate Scientific Impact

An Evaluation of Percentile Measures of Citation Impact, and a Proposal for Making Them Better

Which percentile-based approach should be preferred for calculating normalized citation impact values? An empirical comparison of five approaches including a newly developed citation-rank approach (P100)

Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents

Turning the tables in citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents

Is the new citation-rank approach P100' in bibliometrics really new?

An indicator of the impact of journals based on the percentage of their highly cited publications

From P100 to P100_: Conception and improvement of a new citation-rank approach in bibliometrics

How well does I3 perform for impact measurement compared to other bibliometric indicators? The convergent validity of several (field-normalized) indicators

Integrated Impact Indicators Compared with Impact Factors: an Alternative Research Design with Policy Implications

Professional and citizen bibliometrics: complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators—a state-of-the-art report

Professional and Citizen Bibliometrics: Complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators

How are new citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox?

Alternatives to the Journal Impact Factor: I3 and the Top-10% (or Top-25%?) of the Most-Highly Cited Papers

The validation of (advanced) bibliometric indicators through peer assessments: A comparative study using data from InCites and F1000

The precision of the arithmetic mean, geometric mean and percentiles for citation data: An experimental simulation modelling approach

An indicator of journal impact that is based on calculating a journal's percentage of highly cited publications