San Francisco declaration on research assessment
https://doi.org/10.24069/2542-0267-2020-1-51-53
References
1. Adler R., Ewing J., Taylor P. Citation statistics. A report from the International Mathematical Union. Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research; 2008. Available at: https://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/ IMU/Report/CitationStatistics.pdf [Accessed: 25.06.2020].
2. Seglen P. O. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ. 1997;314:498-502. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2126010/pdf/9056804.pdf [Accessed: 25.06.2020].
3. Not so deep impact. Nature. 2005;435:1003-1004. DOI: 10.1038/4351003b.
4. Vanclay J. K. Impact Factor: Outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification. Scientometric. 2012;92:211-238. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0561-0.
5. The impact factor game. PLoSMed. 2006;3(6):e291 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291.
6. Rossner M., Van Epps H., Hill E. Show me the data. J. Cell Biol. 2007;179(6):1091-1092. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200711140.
7. Rossner M., Van Epps H., Hill E. Irreproducible results: A response to Thomson Scientific. J. Cell Biol. 2008;180(2):254-255. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200801036.
8. Shotton D. Open letter to publishers. January 3, 2013. Available at: http://opencitations.wordpress. com/2013/01/03/open-letter-to-publishers [Accessed: 25.06.2020].
Review
For citations:
San Francisco declaration on research assessment. Science Editor and Publisher. 2020;5(1):51-53. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24069/2542-0267-2020-1-51-53
Views: 904
Email this article 
