Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Correspondence
Nature 445, 709 (15 February 2007) | doi:10.1038/445709b; Published online 14 February 2007
Quality evaluation needs some better quality tools
Thomas F. Döring1
- Division of Biology, Imperial College London, Silwood Park campus, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, UK
In their Commentary "Measures for measures" (Nature 444, 1003–1004; 2006), Sune Lehmann and colleagues report that some widely used research 'quality' evaluation tools based on citation indices are unreliable, because these measures do not minimize statistical uncertainty. This highly interesting study shows, disturbingly, how little evaluation measures have been scrutinized by users so far.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.