Download data versus traditional impact metrics : Measuring impact in a sample of biomedical doctoral dissertations Urban Andersson, Jonas Gilbert, Karin Henning Gothenburg University Library Gothenburg, Sweden
Gothenburg University Library Digital Services electronic publishing e-journals and e-books databases web site development IT development
Gothenburg University Library Bibliometric Services indicators for resource allocation science mapping collaboration and network analyses citation and performance analyses collection development
Download data versus traditional impact metrics
Are the different methods complementary or correlating? How to develop methods to measure the relationship?
The case – ”Best doctoral thesis”!
Compilation thesis Comprehensive summary ( pages) papers
Pdf-file for the thesis (comprehensive summary) stored in local repository. Link to published article at external publishers site.
Citation data from ISI Web of Science Field normalized citation scores Example: Endocrinology Article citations World average 10 citations Field normalized citations score 20/10 = 2 ”Times cited”
Analyzing the data Number of downloads Number of views Average of papers field score Number of times cited DISS ,7649 DISS ,943 DISS ,956 DISS ,3817 DISS 5… ,606
Lack of correlation between citations and downloads Methods comparedCorrelation score Citation field data – views data-0,13 Citation field data – download data-0,05 Times cited - views data-0,11 Times cited – download data-0,06
Additional relationships Correlation between peer judgement and citations Correlation between PR activities and downloads/views
Summary Providing diverse data (both downloads and citations) Visibility Enhancement of methods
Thanks for your attention!