Citation rates and journal impact factors are not suitable for evaluation of research

References

• Cole S, Cole J R, Simon G A. Chance and consensus in peer review. Science 1981; 214: 881–886
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernst E, Saradeth T, Resch K L. Drawbacks of peer review. Nature 1993; 363: 296
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen H F, Jørgensen B H. Styring af forskning: Kan forskningsindikatorer anvendes?. Frederiksberg, Denmark, Samfundslitteratur; 1995; 1–204
   Google Scholar
• Taubes G. Measure for measure in science. Science 1993; 260: 884–886
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen H. ACTA Sociologica på den internationale arena - hvad kan SSCI fortselle?. Dansk Sociologi 1996; 2: 72–78
   Google Scholar
• Moed H F, Burger W J M, Frankfort J G, Van Raan A F J. On the Measurement of Research Performance: The Use of Bibliometric Indicators. Science Studies Unit, LISBON-lnstitute, University of Leiden, Leiden 1987; 1–199
   Google Scholar
• Korevaar J C, Moed H F. Validation of bibliometric indicators in the field of mathematics. Scientometrics 1996; 37: 117–130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moed H F, Burger W J M, Frankfort J G, Van Raan A F J. The application of bibliometric indicators: important field- and time-dependent factors to be considered. Scientometrics 1985; 8: 177–203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivertsen G. Norsk Forskning på den Internasjonale Arena. En Sammenlikning av 18 OECD-lands Artikler og Siteringer i Science Citation Index 1973–86. Inst.Stud.Res.Higher Educat., Oslo 1991; 1–90
   Google Scholar
• Andersen H. Tidsskriftpublicering og forskningsevaluer-ing. Biblioteksarbejde 1996; 17: 19–26
   Google Scholar
• Artus H M. Science indicators derived from databases. Scientometrics 1996; 37: 297–311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lange L. Effects of disciplines and countries on citation habits. An analysis of empirical papers in behavioural sciences. Scientometrics 1985; 8: 205–215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narin F, Hamilton K S. Bibliometric performance measures. Scientometrics 1996; 36: 293–310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun T, Glänzel W, Grupp H. The scientometric weight of 50 nations in 27 science areas 1989–1993 Part I. I. Life sciences. Scientometrics 1996; 34: 207–237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Møller A P. National citations. Nature 1990; 348: 480
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade N. Citation analysis: Anew tool for science administrators. Science 1975; 188: 429–433
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans J T, Nadjari H I, Burchell S A. Quotational and reference accuracy in surgical journals. A continuing peer review problem. J Am Med Ass 1990; 263: 1353–1354
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seglen P O. Kan siteringsanalyse og andre bibliometriske metoder brakes til evaluering av forskningskvalitet?. NOP-Nytt (Helsingfors) 1989; 15: 2–20
   Google Scholar
• MacRoberts M H, MacRoberts B R. Problems of citation analysis: a critical review. J Am Soc Information Sci 1989; 40: 342–349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton D P. Research papers: Who's uncited now. Science 1991; 251: 25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomperts M C. The law of constant citation for scientific literature. J Documentation 1968; 24: 113–117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seglen P O. Bruk av siteringsanalyse og andre bibliometriske metoder i evaluering av forskningsaktivitet. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 1989; 31: 3229–3234
   Google Scholar
• Hargens L L, Felmlee D H. Structural determinants of stratification in science. Am Sociol Rev 1984; 49: 685–697
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinkler P. Relationships between the rate of scientific development and citations. The chance for a citedness model. Scientometrics 1996; 35: 375–386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narin F, Pinski G, Gee H H. Structure of the biomedical literature. J Am Soc Inform Sci 1976; 27: 25–45
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folly G, Hajtman B, Nagy J I, Ruff I. Some methodological problems in ranking scientists by citation analysis. Scientometrics 1981; 3: 135–147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seglen P O. Evaluation of scientists by journal impact. Representations of Science and Technology, P Weingart, R Sehringer, M Winterhager. DSWO Press, Leiden 1992; 240–252
   Google Scholar
• Lewison G, Anderson J, Jack J. Assessing track records. Nature 1995; 377: 671
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinkler P. Model for quantitative selection of relative scientometric impact indicators. Scientometrics 1996; 36: 223–236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science 1972; 178: 471–479
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics 1986; 10: 157–177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magri M H, Solari A. The SCI Journal Citation Reports: A potential tool for studying journals? I. Description of the JCR journal population based on the number of citations received, number of source items, impact factor, immediacy index and cited half-life. Scientometrics 1996; 35: 93–117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moed H F, Van Leeuwen T N, Reedijk J. A critical analysis of the journal impact factors of Angewandte Chemie and The Journal of the American Chemical Society. Inaccuracies in published impact factors based on overall citations only. Scientometrics 1996; 37: 105–116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moed H F, Van Leeuwen T N. Impact factors can mislead. Nature 1996; 381: 186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourke P, Butler L. Standard issues in a national bibliometric database: the Australian case. Scientometrics 1996; 35: 199–207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes S C. When more is less: Quantity versus quality of publications in the evaluation of academic vitae. Am Psychologist 1983; 38: 1398–1400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sengupta I N. Three new parameters in bibliometric research and their application to rerank periodicals in the field of biochemistry. Scientometrics 1986; 10: 235–242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semenza G. Editorial. FEBS Lett 1996; 389: 1–2
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe N B. Journal impact factors. Nature 1995; 377: 260–261
   Google Scholar
• Sorokin N I. Impact factors of Russian journals. Nature 1996; 380: 578
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seglen P O. Causal relationship between article citedness and journal impact. J Am Soc Information Sci 1994; 45: 1–11
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Opthof T. Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardiovascular Res 1997; 33: 1–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon M D. How authors select journals: A test of the reward maximization model of submission behaviour. Social Studies of Science 1984; 14: 27–43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seglen P O. The skewness of science. J Am Soc Information Sci 1992; 43: 628–638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar