Bibliometric comparison of Nobel Prize laureates: a few suggestions
Waseem Hassan,Fred Paas
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-024-03648-w
2024-12-05
Naunyn-Schmiedeberg s Archives of Pharmacology
Abstract:This study offers insights into a paper by the esteemed editor-in-chief, who conducted a bibliometric comparison of Nobel laureates in physiology, medicine, and chemistry to examine the substantial influence these scientists have had on their respective fields (Naunyn–Schmiedeberg's Arch Pharmacol, 397, 2024, 7169–7185). Analyzing metrics such as laureates' nationalities, ages at productivity peaks, H-index, and age-adjusted H-index, the research highlights distinct career patterns among these distinguished scientists. The present study addresses the limitations of traditional metrics, like the H-index, which may undervalue early-career contributions or multidisciplinary impacts due to its focus on cumulative citations. Alternative indicators such as the H-upper, H-center, and H-tail indices are proposed to capture more balanced aspects of scholarly influence, highlighting top-cited, moderately cited, and broadly influential work, respectively. This study also suggests the value of incorporating composite indices such as the HG-composite and Q2 indices in relevant future studies. A list of other indicators is also provided, which may be employed in similar studies. In the same vein, altmetrics, such as social media engagement, download counts, and mentions in digital and traditional media, further complement these metrics by illustrating the broader, more immediate societal relevance of Nobel laureates' work. The present study proposes a multi-dimensional approach for evaluating research impact, integrating various metrics, and highlighting the need for cross-database comparisons to ensure accurate assessments.
pharmacology & pharmacy