Comparison of Brazilian researchers in clinical medicine: are criteria for ranking well-adjusted?

  • Authors:

  • Eduardo A. Oliveira;Enrico A. Colosimo;Daniella R. Martelli;Isabel G. Quirino;Maria Christina Oliveira;Leonardo S. Lima;Ana Cristina Simões E Silva;Hercílio Martelli-Júnior

  • Affiliations:

  • Department of Pediatrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais , Belo Horizonte, Brazil and , Belo Horizonte, Brazil 30310-580;Department of Statistics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil;Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros, Montes Claros, Brazil;Department of Pediatrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais , Belo Horizonte, Brazil;Department of Pediatrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais , Belo Horizonte, Brazil;Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros, Montes Claros, Brazil;Department of Pediatrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais , Belo Horizonte, Brazil;Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros, Montes Claros, Brazil

  • Venue:
  • Scientometrics
  • Year:
  • 2012

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Quantifying the relative performance of individual scholars has become an integral part of decision-making in research policy. The objective of the present study was to evaluate if the scholarship rank of Brazilian Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) researchers in Medicine is consistent with their scientific productivity. The Lattes curricula of 411 researchers (2006---2008) were included in the study. Scholarship category was the variable of interest. Other variables analyzed were: time since receiving the doctorate, teaching activity (undergraduate, master's and doctoral students), number of articles published, and number of papers indexed by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and Scopus databases. Additional performance indicators included were: citations, h-index, and m-index. There was a significant difference among scholarship categories regarding number of papers per year, considering the entire scientific career (P P P = 0.23). There was a significant difference in h-index among scholarship categories in both databases, i.e. (P P m-index, there was a significant difference among categories only in the ISI database (P = 0.012). According to our findings, a better instrument for qualitative and quantitative indicators is needed to identify researchers with outstanding scientific output.