The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level

497 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The inconsistency of the h-index (2011, background): “…publications (e.g., Egghe, 2006), other authors claim that the index tends to undervalue scientists with a selective publication strategy (e.g., Costas & Bordons, 2007), and still other authors point out limitations of the index in the way in which coauthorship is dealt with (e.g., Egghe,…”
Some bibliometric procedures for analyzing and evaluating research fields (2017, unknown): “Moreover, the h-index presents some advantages [1], such as, objectivity [19] and robustness [66] due to it is insensitive to a set of lowly cited paper.”
h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields (2009, methodology): “Costas and Bordons (2007) mentioned other good properties of the h-index.”
A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015, background): “…is highly correlated with other bibliometric indicators, but more so with measures of productivity such as number of papers and total number of citations, rather than with citations per paper which is more a measure of pure impact (Alonso et al., 2009; Costas & Bordons, 2007; Todeschini, 2011).”