Tools and methodologies for scientific evaluation: bibliometrics, scientometrics and informatics
This study analyzed the main tools and methodologies used in bibliometrics, scientometrics, informatics and altmetrics, through a descriptive analytical review of secondary sources published between 2019-2024. The research identified and evaluated the most used tools, including VOSviewer (75% usage in network analysis), CiteSpace (60% in trend identification), and Altmetric.com (80% in alternative metrics). The results revealed that fundamental mathematical models such as Lotka's law (70% application), Zipf's law (55%) and Bradford's law (50%) continue to be essential pillars for the quantitative analysis of scientific production. Altmetrics were found to be gaining significant relevance, with Plum Analytics used in 65% of applications to assess the social impact of research. The study concluded that the integration of traditional and emerging tools allows for a more complete and multidimensional evaluation of scientific activity, although there are limitations in the accessibility and complexity of implementation of some tools.
Authors
- Lee Yang Díaz-Chieng (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5501-7502)
- Juan Manuel Quintero-Ramírez (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1040-2690)
- Daniel Román-Acosta (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4300-9174)
- Elisabeth Viviana Lucero Baldevenites (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1328-8117)
- José Humberto Puente (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0100-9404)
Institutions
- Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (ES)
- Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (GT)
- Universidad de Oriente (VE)
- Colegio de Postgraduados (MX)
- Universidad Independiente (CR)
- Hospital Universitario de Sincelejo (CO)
- Universidad de Guantánamo (CU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Seminars in Medical Writing and Education
- Published
- 2024-12-30
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.56294/mw2024395
- Citations
- 2
- Primary Topic
- scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.92