Commentary on Thompson DR and Watson R (2010) Guest editorial: h-indexes and the performance of professors of nursing in the UK. Journal of Clinical Nursing 19, 2957–2958
Article first published online: 10 AUG 2011
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Journal of Clinical Nursing
Special Issue: European Doctoral Conference in Nursing
Volume 20, Issue 17-18, pages 2685–2686, September 2011
How to Cite
Sasso, L. (2011), Commentary on Thompson DR and Watson R (2010) Guest editorial: h-indexes and the performance of professors of nursing in the UK. Journal of Clinical Nursing 19, 2957–2958. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 20: 2685–2686. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03821.x
- Issue published online: 10 AUG 2011
- Article first published online: 10 AUG 2011
In Italy, there is controversy in nursing about impact factors. The recent introduction of nursing education in universities (June 2000), specifically in the Faculties of Medicine, requires that scientific output is measured based on the impact factor and h-index, to rate academics’ performance.
The current necessity in Italy to reduce the number of academic staff has excessively raised academics’ performance rating targets. In fact, the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research has recently declared that Italian academics have to achieve an h-index of at least 25, if they want to obtain governmental funding and enrol new researchers.
In nursing, this situation runs the risk of giving rise to two critical and related phenomena:
- •First, in Italy, nursing research, as well as the first PhD programmes of nursing, started only in 2006; very few Italian indexed scientific nursing journals are available to publish. Novice nursing researchers are obliged to find space in an already overcrowded international sector. Furthermore, owing to the nature of nursing, the impact factors of nursing journals tend to be lower than medical journals. Above all, the combination of all these factors could generate an unhealthy frenzy to publish at all costs, known as ‘impact fever’ (Bloch & Walter 2001, Anseel et al. 2004, Ironside 2007, Nolan et al. 2008).
- •Second, the consequence of this ‘impact fever’ could lead to ‘impact factor addiction that can generate an impact factor cessation’ (Jackson et al. 2009). The result of this could be that nursing professionals, pressured by the need to compete with overwhelmingly high-rating models (impact factors and h-indices) for nursing, could concentrate on publishing, at the expense of the true development of nursing.
Thompson and Watson (2010) report that, in the UK, which boasts a long tradition of nursing publications, only eight of the top-ranking nursing scholars have an h-index >10 (meaning that 10 papers of their papers have been cited at least 10 times). It is, therefore, clear that the decision to set an exceedingly high h-index for Italian nursing academics has no rational foundation; moreover, owing to the intrinsic nature of nursing, the h-index cannot be the sole measurement to rate nurses’ academic excellence. As suggested by Hack et al. (2010), nurse academics who are in difficulty should on the contrary be supported, so that they may have sufficient time and resources to dedicate to their research activities and be in the condition to achieve an acceptable h-index in line with international standards.
Financial disclosure and conflict of interest
The authors hereby declare that the research was self-financed and did not receive any external funding. There are no conflicts of interest to be declared.
- 2004) Journal impact factors and self citations: implications for psychology journals. American Psychologist 59, 49–51. , , & (
- 2001) The impact factor: time for change. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 35, 563–568. & (
- 2010) Research citation analysis of nursing academics in Canada: identifying success indicators. Journal of Advanced Nursing 66, 2542–2549. , , & (
- 2007) Rethinking the meaning and significance of journal impact factors. Journal of Gerontological Nursing 33, 3–4. (
- 2009) Editorial: nurses and publications – the impact of the impact factor. Journal of Clinical Nursing 18, 2537–2538. , & (
- 2008) Editorial: the research excellence framework (TEF): a major impediment to free and informed debate. International Journal of Nursing Studies 45, 487–488. , & (
- 2010) Guest editorial: h-indices and the performance of professors of nursing in the UK. Journal of Clinical Nursing 19, 2957–2958. & (