Science, Art and Religion

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 1 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Scientometrics: The Imperative for Scientific Validity of the Scientific Publications Content

Izet Masic

Keywords : Citation, Google Scholar Index, H-Index, IF, Scientific publications, Scientometry, Validity

Citation Information : Masic I. Scientometrics: The Imperative for Scientific Validity of the Scientific Publications Content. 2022; 1 (1):56-80.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-11005-0017

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 06-05-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Background: Scientometry is a part of Scientology (the science of science) that analyzes scientific articles and their citation in a selected sample of scientific journals. The basic part of scientometry is bibliometrics, which was introduced in the 1970s to mark quantitative research on communication processes by applying appropriate mathematical and statistical methods to published publications. Scientific research is the only real way and method for the proliferation of true knowledge in all spheres of science, but also in academic institutions. The ability to study a scientific problem is the highest level of knowledge. Medical, and in a broader sense biomedical scientific research, is a process of systematic research of current and important health problems related to defined aspects of physical, mental, or social well-being of the population of local, regional or global character. Objective/Aim: This article aims to present the current tools available in scientometry for the evaluation of the scientific validity of published articles and explain the purpose. Materials and Methods: The author searched the most influential online databases and analyzed deposited papers on the topic of scientometrics and used the descriptive method of reviewing important facts about experiences with scientometrics in the scientific and academic practice. Results and discussion: Researchers in medical research examine biological, socioeconomic, and environmental factors in which we live and work, which affect health and contribute to illness, disability, or death. The most important satisfaction for any scientist should be the realization that the result of research in a certain way in the future will affect at least one person to be healthier, which should be fundamental to the realization of research in practice—at universities or specialized scientific laboratories and institutes. The format of scientific articles can vary greatly from journal to journal. Nevertheless, many of them follow the IMRAD scheme, recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), or the BOMRAD form, recommended by the author of this article. Scientometrics analyzes scientific articles and their citation in a selected sample of scientific journals. Bibliometrics denotes quantitative research of communication processes by applying appropriate mathematical and statistical methods to books and other communication media. Bibliometric methods are used for quantitative analysis of written materials. Citation provides guidelines for scientific work because it stimulates scientists to deal with the most current areas of research, organizes scientific article at the world level, or shapes and directs it. Citation is influenced by: article quality, understanding of the article, language in which the article is written, loyalty to a group of researchers, article type, etc. Some of the indicators used in the evaluation of scientific work are Impact factor (IF); Citation of the article; Journal citations; Number and order of authors, etc. The impact factor is the number of citations of articles published in the journal during the previous two years divided by the total number of articles published in the journal during the same period. The factor of influence depends on the quality of the journal, the language in which it was printed, the area it covers, and the journal distribution system. In this article, we pointed out that the h-Index presents one of a set of valuable measures to determine scientific excellence (bibliometrics recognize also m-value as useful). Although the Hirsch index (h-Index) is a better measure than a citation impact factor (IF), it is still based on the opinions of other authors. Conclusion: Since research in medicine can affect the improvement of clinical and public health practices, it is necessary to conduct them. Only quality research with exact results offers the scientific community new information about the examined problem, the researcher's satisfaction, the possibility of communicating and conducting scientific dialogue with other members of the academic community, and opening opportunities to receive a critical review of those who have insight into the research.

  1. Masic I, Kujundzic E. Sciences Editing in Biomedicine and Humanity. Avicena. Sarajevo, 2013.
  2. Masic I. Medical publication and scientometrics. J Res Med Sci 2013;18(6):516–521. PMID: 24250704; PMCID: PMC3818625.
  3. Masic I, Jankovic SM, Kurjak A, et al. Guidelines for editing Biomedical Journals: recommendation by Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Acta Inform Med 2020;28(4):232–236. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2020.28.232-236
  4. Masic I, Begic E, Donev MD, et al. Sarajevo Declaration on integrity and visibility of scholarly journals. Croat Med J 2016;57(6):527–529. DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2016.57.527
  5. Masic I, Jankovic MS. The basic principles of editing biomedical scientific journals. Int J Biomed Healthc 2020;8(1):6–10. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2020.1.6-10
  6. Masic I. Writing and editing of scientific papers using BOMRAD structured form and proper style of reference's citation. Int J Biomed Healthc 2021;9(1):4–14. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2021.9.4-14
  7. Ufnalska S. EASE guidelines for authors and translators of scientific articles. Int J Biomed Healthc 2020;8(2):129–130. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2020.2.129-130
  8. Masic I. How to search, write, prepare and publish the scientific papers in the biomedical journals. Acta Inform Med 2011;19(2):68–79. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2011.19.68-79
  9. Masic I, Sabzghabaee AM. How clinicians can validate scientific contents? J Res Med Sci 2014;19(7):583–585. PMID: 25364354; PMCID: PMC4214013.
  10. Masic I. Peer review - essential for article and journal scientific assessment and validity. Med Arch 2016;70(3):168–171. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2016.70.168-171
  11. Masic I. The Malversations of Authorship - current status in academic community and how to prevent it. Acta Inform Med 2018;26(1):4–9. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2018.26.4-9
  12. Masic I, Jankovic SM. Meta–analysing methodological quality of published research: importance and effectiveness. Stud Health Technol Inform 2020;272:229–232. DOI: 10.3233/SHTI200536
  13. Masic I, Begic E. Meta–analysis as statistical and analytical method of journal's content scientific evaluation. Acta Inform Med 2015;23(1):4–11. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2015.23.4-11
  14. Masic I. Scientometric analysis: a technical need for medical science researchers either as authors or as peer reviewers. J Res Pharm Pract 2016;5(1):1–6. DOI: 10.4103/2279-042X.176562
  15. Masic I, Begic E, Begic N. Validity of scientometric analysis of medical research output. Stud Health Technol Inform 2017;238:246–249. PMID: 28679935.
  16. Gustavii B. How to Write and Illustrate Scientific Papers. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge–New York, 2008: 1–2.10, Jacobsen HK. Health Research Methods: a Practical Guide. Jones & Barlett Learning, LLC, Ontario, 2012:9–237.
  17. Sengor AMC. How scientometry is killing science. Available at: Accessed on November 20th, 2021.
  18. Masic I, Kurjak A, Jankovic MS, et al. On Occasion of the 12th “Days of AMNuBiH 2021” and “SWEP 2021” Conferences, Sarajevo, Bosnia nd Herzgovina. Acta Inform Med 2021;29(4):295–310. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2021.4.295-310
  19. Masic I, Kurjak A, Zildzic M, et al. On Occasion of the 11th “Days of AMNuBiH 2020” and “SWEP 2020” Conferences, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Int J Biomed Healthc 2020;8(2): 113–128. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2020.2.113-128
  20. Masic I, Jakovljevic M, Sinanovic O, et al. The Second Mediterranean Seminar on Science Writing, Editing and Publishing (SWEP - 2018), Sarajevo, December 8th, 2018. Acta Inform Med 2018;26(4): 284–299. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2018.4.284-299
  21. Masic I, Donev D, Sinanovic O, et al. The First Mediterranean Seminar on Science Writing, Editing and Publishing, Sarajevo, December 2–3, 2016. Acta Inform Med 2016;24(6):424–435. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2016.6.424-435
  22. Jankovic MS, Masic I. Importance of adequate research design in biomedicine. Int J Biomed Healthc 2019;7(2):64–66. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2019.2.64-66
  23. Masic I, Jankovic MS. Inflated co-authorship introduces bias to current scientometric indices. Med Arch 2021;75(4):248–255. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2021.75.248-255
  24. Jankovic SM. Low sensitivity and specificity of existing bibliometric indices gives unrealistic picture of an author's contribution to science. Acta Inform Med 2021;29(1):69–70. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2021.29.69-70
  25. Jankovic SM, Masic I. Methodological errors in clinical studies published by medical journals of ex-Yugoslav countries. Acta Inform Med 2020;28(2):84–93. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2020.28.84-93
  26. Masic I. The importance of proper citation of references in biomedical articles. Acta Inform Med 2013;21(3):148–155. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2013.21.148-155
  27. Masic I. H-index and how to improve it? Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;10(1):83–89. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1446
  28. Masic I, Begic E. Scientometric dilemma: is h-index adequate for scientific validity of academic work? Acta Inform Med 2016;24(4):228–232. DOI: 10.5455/aim.24.228-232
  29. Masic I. Index factors for assessing the scientific journal validity, its articles and their authors. J Forensic Anthropol 2016;1:03. DOI: 10.35248/2684-1304.16.1.103
  30. Masic I. The most influential scientists in the development of medical informatics (17): Eugene Garfield. Acta Inform Med 2017;25(2):145–145. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2017.2.145-145
  31. Masic I. Plagiarism in scientific publishing. Acta Inform Med 2012;20(4):208–213. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.208-213
  32. Roig M. Avoiding unethical writing practice. Food Chem Toxicol 2012;50(10):3385–3387. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2012.06.043
  33. Amstrong JD. Plagiarism – what is it, whoom does it offend and how does one deal with it? AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993;161(3):479–484. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.161.3.8352091
  34. Luscher FT. The codex of science: honesty, precision, and truth – and its violations. Eur Heart J 2013;34(14):1018–1023. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht063
  35. Masic I, Hodzic A, Mulic S. Ethics in medical research and publication. Int J Prev Med 2014;5(9):1073–1082. PMID: 25317288; PMCID: PMC4192767.
  36. Masic I. Ethical aspects and dilemmas of preparing, writing and publishing of the scientific papers in the biomedical journals. Acta Inform Med 2012;20(3):141–148. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.141-148
  37. Masic I. Plagiarism in scientific research and publications and how to prevent it. Mater Sociomed 2014;26(2):141–146. DOI: 10.5455/msm.2014.26.141-146
  38. Arafat Yasir SM. Plagiarism: an important research misconduct. J Workplace Behav Health 2017;6(2):73–75. DOI: 10.5455/jbh.20170123102746
  39. Mohammadali M. Shoja, Anastasia Arynchyna (Eds.). A Guide to the Scientific Career. Willey Blackwell. London, 2019: 163–178 (Chapter 19).
  40. Masic I, Milinovic K. On-line biomedical databases–the best source for quick search of the scientific information in the biomedicine. Acta Inform Med 2012;20(2):72–84. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.72-84
  41. Masic I. On the Occasion of the Symposium “Scientometrics, Citation, Plagiarism and Predatory in Scientific Publishing”, Sarajevo, 2021. Med Arch. 2021;75(6):408–412. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2021.6.408-412
  42. Available at: Accessed on: November 25th, 2021.
  43. Available at: Accessed on: November 25th, 2021.
  44. Available at: Accessed on: November 25th, 2021.
  45. Masic I, Jankovic MS. Why registering your research study involving human subjects before its onset? Int J Biomed Healthc 2020;8(2):64–67. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2020.2.64-67
  46. Masic I, Jankovic MS. Comparative analysis of Web of Science and Pubmed Indexed Medical journals published in former Yugoslav countries. Med Arch 2020;74(4):252–264. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2020.4.252-264
  47. Jankovic SM, Masic I. Evaluation of preclinical and clinical studies published in medical journals of Bosnia and Herzegovina: methodology issues. Acta Inform Med 2020;28(1):4–11. DOI: 10.5455/aim.2020.28.4-11
  48. Masic I. Bosnian and Herzegovinian medical scientists in PubMed database. Med Arch 2013;67(2):147–150. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2013.67.147-151
  49. Masic I. Evaluation of the Medical Academic Community of Bosnia and Herzegovina based on scopus parameters. Med Arch 2017;71(3):164–168. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2017.71.164-168
  50. Balogun J, Mamuzo E, Okonofua F, et al. Bibliometric profile of the African Academy of Sciences medical and health sciences fellows. Pan Afr Med J 2021;38:60. DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2021.38.60.21004
  51. Lelo S, Zujo Zekic D, Kasic Lelo M. “H-indeks” kao pokazatelj naučne uspješnosti istraživača Univerziteta u Sarajevu. EDUCA, 13(13), 157–160.
  52. Ufnalska S. Ten years of EASE guidelines. Int J Biomed Healthc 2020;8(2):4–5. DOI: 10.5455/ijbh.2020.1.4-5
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.