Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The present study compared research productivity of Library and Information Science (LIS) faculties working in 61 government universities of India and 55 American Library Association-accredited LIS programs in the United States. A regression model is used to determine the effect of independent variables i.e. number of publications, number of citations per publication, and total number of citations for top-cited publication on h-index value of faculties. Further, k-means cluster analysis (three tier) is performed for each rank of faculties (full, associate & assistant professor) based on their publication and citation. The findings of this study indicate that for both countries h-index value of LIS faculties is related to number of publications and citations per publication, while mitigating the impact of a highly-cited publication. The top tier of Indian LIS faculties by publications, have more publications, citations for most-cited publication, and larger h-index than the lowest tier in the U.S. (though these researchers do have a higher number of citations per publication). The most productive LIS Faculties in the U.S. have about 3.5 times more publications, citations, and h-index than Indian LIS faculties. Finally, for the evaluation of LIS researchers for tenure and promotion decisions in regard to h-index, the study suggests that it may provide more equitable valuation of research productivity than looking at raw number of citation counts, while providing more information about quality of publications than just the raw number of publications alone.
Lund et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: