almost two decades, the Document Studies Group of the Index Foundation
has released CUIDEN Citation, a tool that forms a part of the CUIDEN
family, and is designed to provide information about the indicators
of impact or consequence of the nursing journals published in the
Iberoamerican Scientific Space (ECI). These impact indicators have
been published biannually and in their latest update, included the
"setpoint Impact Factor (vaFI). The vaFI arises from an interest
in understanding the equivalence between the CUIDEN Immediate Impact
Indicator (RIC) and the Impact Factor (FI), bibliometric indicators
that basically evaluate, through the counting of citations made
during a certain period of time, the impact of scientific publications.
FI allows the evaluation of the relative importance of a scientific
journal in comparison to others in the same discipline area; it
is considered the main bibliometric indicator for assessing scientific
journals and the first objective measure developed for this purpose
within the diversity of bibliometric indicators.1,2
This indicator normalizes the number of citations according to the
size of the journal,3
showing the visibility and impact that scientific publications have
over researchers. This is conditioned by the citation, as a citation
received by the article, but depending on the quality of the article
can also be influenced by other factors such as the prestige of
the author, the timeliness of the topic, the language used and the
quality of the journal, among other factors. The calculation of
this indicator is done by dividing the number of citations received
for articles published in a given journal during the year of study,
corresponding to the two previous years, by the number of citable
articles published by that journal during the same time period.
the RIC indicator, as it is currently presented, has its origin
in a request made to the Index Foundation by the Institute for Scientific
Information (ISI) in Philadelphia (USA), which annually calculates
the FI of journals included in the Science Citation Index, the Social
Science Index and the Arts and Humanities Index. Said institution
requested to withdraw the bibliometric indicators of ECI nursing
publications from the website of Index Foundation, claiming the
FI formula to be its own intellectual property and therefore its
exclusive right to use for calculations.4
This act led the GED to rethink its formula for calculating indicators,
allowing it to assess the impact of nursing scientific publications
produced in the ECI. In this formula, the RIC shows the impact of
publications, taking into account a three year window, i.e. this
indicator is calculated by dividing the number of citations that
a source journal receives in the study year, plus those of the two
previous years, over the number of articles published in the year
of study. Moreover, the RIC criterion is better adjusted to the
behaviour of citations in an applied science like nursing, whose
period of obsolescence is usually four years.5
there is an excessive reliance on the FI calculated by ISI, which
in fact is the most widely used indicator internationally, and practically
the only one taken into account by more than a few governments when
evaluating scientists and making decisions in the construction of
science policy, without considering that this should not be the
only form of knowledge evaluation.1,6,7
It is necessary to use other forms of evaluation that allow for
the contextualization of the influence of scientific production
in the development of the discipline in which it is framed.8
Therefore, it should be remembered that the FI is not an indicator
of the quality of work, as it only evaluates journals in terms of
Because of the erroneous association between publication in journals
with high impact factors and quality of work, it is thought that
in order to be published articles must undergo a rigorous selection
this is only an assumption and has not been scientifically corroborated.
However, there is still not a consensus on the best way to evaluate
the quality of scientific work and for now peer evaluation is considered
the best alternative.1,6,7
It is necessary to create qualitative evaluations based on criteria
of relevance, rigor and usefulness, which compliment the quantitative
system of evaluation based on FI is useful for internationally visible
scientific production, which is covered mainly in Anglo-Saxon countries,
but shows limitations for assessing the scientific production of
Iberoamerican nursing, as only a fraction of this production is
indexed in the ISI databases.9
We hope these limitations diminish with the application of the recent
agreement between the ISI and Scientific Electronic Library Online
(SciELO), with the aim of integrating the SciELO collection into
the Web of Knowledge, to give greater visibility and assess to scientific
production generated in the ECI.12
However, despite this agreement and due to the limitations of SciELO
(it does not include publications that do not allow open access),
it must be recognized that not all nursing scientific publications
generated, which are the most easily accessible and transferable
by clinicians, will be covered in the regional context.9
the GED continues to develop its own indexes of the scientific production
of regional nursing, giving nursing research visibility and publicizing
its impact and consumption. Because of this the vaFI can be presented
as a value that shows the equivalence between the RIC and FI; by
finding the quotient of the value of RIC and the vaFI, the FI value
according to the ISI can be produced (the first calculations refer
to 2010 and are available on: http://www.index-f.com/cuiden_cit/citacion.php).
The important fact here is that these are values based on scientific
production assessed by CUIDEN Citation, which in 2010 included 36
source journals in the study. These results show that the behaviour
of RIC indicators, regarding the behaviour of those of FI, demonstrates
values that favour scientific production in the ECI. This proves
the reality of the exponential increase in the production and use
of scientific production by Iberoamerican nurses, who should undoubtedly
have an effect on the consolidation of the process of construction
in the nursing discipline.13
1. González de Dios J; Moya, M; Mateos Hernández MA. Indicadores
bibliométricos: Características y limitaciones en el análisis
de la actividad científica. An Esp Pediatr 1997; 47: 235-244.
2. Portugal, Maria João; Branca, Susana; Rodrigues, Manuel. Dados
de medida de fator de impacto das revistas científicas. Referência
2011; III(5): 211-215.
3. Bordons, María; Zulueta, Mª Ángeles. Evaluación
de la actividad científica a través de indicadores bibliométricos.
Rev Esp Cardiol 1999; 52: 790-800.
4. Amezcua, Manuel. ¿Para qué sirve el Índice de Impacto
de una revista? Index de Enfermería 2010; 19(2-3): 83-87.
5. Gálvez Toro A, Poyatos Huertas E. Obsolescencia de las Revistas
Españolas de Enfermería (año 2000). Index de Enfermería
2002; 38: 62-65.
6. Puche, Rodolfo C. El factor de impacto, sus variantes y su influencia
en la promoción académica. Medicina (Buenos Aires) 2011; 71: 484-489.
7. Jiménez-Contreras, Evaristo; Robinson-García, Nicolás;
Cabezas-Clavijo, Álvaro. Productividad e impacto de los investigadores
españoles: umbrales de referencia por áreas científicas.
Revista Española de Documentación Científica 2011; 34(4):
8. Umbelino, Fernanda Maria BC. Factor de Impacto de Revistas Científicas
na Área de Enfermagem. Referência 2009; II(8): 95-100.
9. Gálvez Toro, Alberto; Amezcua, Manuel; Hueso Montoro, César.
CUIDEN Citación y la valoración de las publicaciones científicas
enfermeras. Index de Enfermería 2005; 51: 7-9.
10. Amezcua, Manuel. Controversias en la Evaluación del Conocimiento:
alegatos a propósito de una ciencia aplicada. Index de Enfermería
2011; 20(1-2): 7-11.
11. Camí, Jordi. Impactolatría: diagnóstico y tratamiento.
Medicina Clínica. 1997; 109(13): 515-524.
12. PR Newswire [sede Web]. Filadelfia: PRNewswire; 25 de julio de 2012.
Thomson Reuters destaca los centros de investigación emergentes con SciELO
a Web of Knowledge. Disponible en: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/thomson-reuters-destaca-los-centros-de-investigacion-emergentes-con-scielo-a-web-of-knowledge-163735176.html
[Consultado el 3.08.2012].
13. Alarcón M, Ana M; Astudillo D, Paula. La investigación
en enfermería en revistas latinoamericanas. Ciencia y Enfermería
2007; XIII(2): 25-31.