Abstract
Citation impact indicators play a relevant role in the evaluation of researchers’ scientific production and can influence research funding and future research outputs. The H-index is widely used in this regard, in spite of several shortcomings such as not considering the actual contribution of each author, the number of authors, their overall scientific production and the scientific quality of citing articles. Several authors have highlighted some of these limits. Alternative systems have been proposed but have gained less fortune.
In order to show that fairer criteria to assess researchers’ scientific impact can be achieved, a workable example is presented through a novel method, integrating the aforementioned elements by using information available in bibliographic databases.
