Back

AuthormetriX: Automated Calculation of Individual Authors' Non-Inflationary Credit-Allocation Schemas' and Collaboration Metrics from a Scopus Corpus

Adeosun, S. O.

2025-01-20 scientific communication and education
10.1101/2025.01.19.633820 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPublication count is the currency in academia, but the most widely used whole count method is considered unfair and inflationary. Several non-inflationary author credit-allocation schemas (NIACAS) have been proposed, but none is widely adopted in practice (e.g., in evaluating faculty scholarly productivity) or in bibliometric research. This low adoption and implementation rate may be due to the complexity in operationalizing the schemas. AimTo develop an application that automates the calculation of individual authors scholarly output metrics based on multiple NIACAS. MethodPublished formulas of NIACAS were written as Python functions wrapped in a Streamlit user interface that takes .csv files of the relevant corpus, and a list of authors Scopus IDs as inputs. The functions calculate the authors output metrics based on NIACAS including first- and last-author straight counts, arithmetic, golden share, and multiple variations of fractional, geometric, and harmonic schemas. Collaboration metrics are also calculated. Secondary features include modelers for author counts and schemas. In a use-case, absolute rank displacement (ARD) and actual contribution proportions (ACP) were compared between highly cited clinical medicine researchers and high h-index pharmacy practice faculty populations. ResultsAuthormetriX accurately calculates individual authors aggregate scholarly output based on 14 NIACAS, from the file inputs. There were schema and population differences in ACP, but only schema differences in ARD within the populations studied. ConclusionsAuthormetriX simplifies the implementation of non-inflationary author credit-allocation schemas and will facilitate their broader adoption in practice and bibliometric research. AuthormetriX is freely available at https://sadeosun-a-uthormetrix-v1.streamlit.app/.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 2%
34.2%
2
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
8.7%
3
FEBS Open Bio
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
4
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.5%
6
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.7%
7
The FEBS Journal
78 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
8
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.7%
9
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.4%
10
FASEB BioAdvances
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
11
BMC Medical Education
20 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
12
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
13
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
14
FEBS Letters
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
15
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.3%
16
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 68%
1.1%
17
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
18
ACS Omega
90 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
FACETS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
20
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
21
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
BioData Mining
15 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
24
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
171 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
25
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
26
Artificial Intelligence in the Life Sciences
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
27
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.5%
28
Journal of Cheminformatics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.5%
29
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 62%
0.5%
30
Journal of Cellular Physiology
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%