Dilts, DM, Rosenblum, D, Trochim, WM. A virtual national laboratory for reengineering clinical translational science. Science Translational Medicine
2012; 4: 118cm2.
Rubio, DM, et al. Developing common metrics for the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs): lessons learned. Clinical and Translational Science
2015; 8: 451–459.
Trochim, WM, et al. Evaluation guidelines for the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs). Clinical and Translational Science
2013; 6: 303–309.
Scott, CS, et al. Expanding assessments of translational research programs: supplementing metrics with value judgments. Evaluation & the Health Professions
2014; 37: 83–97.
Pincus, HA, et al. Evaluation and the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards: a “top ten” list. Evaluation & the Health Professions
2013; 36: 411–431.
Madlock-Brown, C, Eichmann, D. Assessing the translational capacity of five CTSA institutions, 2015. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2015; 768–769.
Thomson Reuters. Using Bibliometrics: A Guide to Evaluating Research Performance with Citation Data. Philadelphia, PA: Thomson Reuters, 2008.
Broadus, RN. Early approaches to bibliometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science
1987; 38: 127–129.
Garfield, E. Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities. New York: Wiley, 1979.
Garfield, E. Commentary—fifty years of citation indexing. International Journal of Epidemiology
2006; 35: 1127–1128.
Rosas, SR, et al. Evaluating research and impact: a bibliometric analysis of research by the NIH/NIAID HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks. PLoS One
2011; 6: e17428.
Trochim, WM, et al. The evaluation of large research initiatives—a participatory integrative mixed-methods approach. American Journal of Evaluation
2008; 29: 8–28.
Donovan, C, et al. Evaluation of the impact of National Breast Cancer Foundation-funded research. Med J Aust. 2014; 3;200(4): 214–218.
Sengupta, IN. Bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics and librametrics—an overview. Libri
1992; 42: 75–98.
Adams, J. Bibliometrics: the citation game. Nature
2014; 510: 470–471.
Marx, W, Bornmann, L. On the causes of subject-specific citation rates in Web of Science. Scientometrics
2014; 102: 1823–1827.
Campbell, P. Escape from the impact factor. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics
2008; 8: 5–6.
Schekman, R. How journals like Nature, Cell and Science are damaging science. The Guardian
2013; 9: 12.
Werner, R. The focus on bibliometrics makes papers less useful. Nature
2015; 517: 245.
Schekman, R. Reforming research assessment. Elife
2013; 2: e00855.
Hutchins, BI, et al. Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): a new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level. PLOS Biology
2015; 14: e1002541. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002541.
Slaughter, A, Frechtling, J. Initial Report on CTSA-Supported Publications: 2007–2010. Westat Report to the National Center for Research Resources
. Rockville, MD: Westat, 2011.
Rafols, I, et al. How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: a comparison between innovation studies and business & management. Research Policy
2012; 41: 1262–1282.
Lauer, MS. Thought exercises on accountability and performance measures at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI): an invited commentary for circulation research. Circulation Research
2011; 108: 405–409.