This study aimed to clarify the status of scientometric indicators and science measurement organizations.
This article is a descriptive and library research. Searching in scientific databases and literature review, we identified r science measurement organizations and scientometric indicators, then extracted checklist. After classifying the bases, a log completed for each of them and they finally were analyzed using Microsoft Excel.
Findings: scientometric indicators in each group are different from scientometric databases. The scales of indicators “impact factor” used in base 22 (38.52) were identified as the most applied scientometric indicator. The “Hirsch index” with at least 15 bases of assessment (71.35) were in second place. As well as the bases of the study, “universities ranking databases” were the highest index using scientometric indicators (85 indicators) and “human and financial databases” obtained the second rank using 56 indicators. In other bases, “JCR” and “professional or subject index” using seven indicators, jointly located at the sixth lowest rate in the indicators, respectively.
The results of the study showed that the measurement bases are different in using scientometric indicators, and similar indicators can be introduced for each group of measurement bases.

The current research aims to investigate the relationship between performances of top world universities according to scientometric indicators and their position in ten international academic ranking systems.
This quantitative correlational research was conducted using scientometric indicators. The population of the study consisted of ten international academic ranking systems and the top 100 universities in each ranking system were selected using purposive sampling method. Elsevier’s SciVal was utilized for data gathering. Moreover, the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (version 18) was used for correlational analysis.
Findings: Results of the study revealed negative but statistically significant associations between six scientometric indicators of the universities, namely total publications, total citations, citations per publication, field-weighted citation impact, highly cited publications and outputs in top journals, and the universities’ position in all ten ranking systems. On contrary, statistically significant relationship between international research collaboration of the universities and their position in ranking systems was only found in the U.S. News & World Report's Best Global Universities Ranking.
Results of the study showed that research performance of the world universities has a great impact on their status in international academic ranking systems.

The rapid growth of scientific production and the number of researchers has made decision makers think about scientific approaches for evaluation of the researchers’ performance. Scientometric indicators have been introduced to analyze science by quantitative methods. The aim of this study was to evaluate the scientific production of academic members at Kerman University of Medical Sciences (KMU) based on Scientometric indicators.
This was a analytical survey research. The study population was scientific productions of all academic members of KMU until 22nd of August, 2014. Direct search of Scopus Database and checklist were used for data collection.
The highest mean (median) of published articles belonged to the Pharmacy School, while the lowest belonged to the Nursing and Midwifery School [17.66(20.50) and 3.08 (0) respectively, (P The results shows that scientific production of KMU academic members is not significantly different from that of other medical universities of Iran, but it is still far away from global standards. Therefore, policy makers should provide the scientific development requirements through wise planning.

Scientometrics indicators are used to assess scientists, universities, and research institutes for scientific policy-making. The aim of this research was to assess the status of top Iranian medical researchers using scientometric indicators. The study was carried out using scientometric methods. The statistical population included the top 500 Iranian researchers in the field of medicine who were ranked in the Iranian Scientometric Information Database (ISID) based on some scientometric indicators. The data were analyzed using SPSS 22 software and Pearson's correlation coefficient, stepwise regression analysis, and Chi-square tests were applied for data analysis. Findings revealed that each researcher had an average h index of 24.04, g index of 40.15, and i10 index of 90.79. There was a positive significant relationship between the number of internationally-collaborated papers and the number of citations received (r = .606, p<.01). The stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that the three variables of paper number, citation counts and mean citation rate determined 72% of the changes in the h-index. It can be concluded that researchers publishing more papers are more likely to be cited. However, their scientometric indexes are not always better than those of other scientists.

Evaluation of researchers has long been performed by scientific organizations, but today regarding the increase in publications and the complexity of the evaluation processes, the new approaches are employed often by using scientometric indicators. Despite diversity of evaluation indicators, they are accompanied by drawbacks that amongst them, the lack of a comprehensive indicator for multidimensional evaluation of researchers in terms of national dimensions is perhaps prominent. The major available scientometric indicators consider the number of articles of a person as well as the number of citations received of those articles as an indicator for quality of research work. The criterion of citing for measuring these indicators has led to criticisms of existing indicators. On the other hand, in Iranian educational organizations, the quality of the journal wherein the article is published is considered as one of the major criteria for evaluating researchers. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) clearly states that journal-based metrics, such as the journal impact factor, should not be used as a substitute for the quality of research papers and evaluation of researchers, recruitment, financial decisions, or promotion of them. Moreover, according to the sixth principle of Leiden's statement, a suitable way for researcher’s evaluation is the selection of a set of possible criteria by scientific and educational institutions. In view of this, it seems indispensable to develop a national author-centered index to measure quantitatively and qualitatively the works of Iranian health researchers according to their official language, scientific and cultural needs, and various fields of health. This index can be a combination of components of current indicators but has the ability to adapt with the conditions of our country. 

Evaluation of the research status of the academic institution provides it with the possibility of accurate research policymaking. Scientometric indicators are important tools for evaluating scientific activities of individuals, groups, and institutions. The current research aims to analysis the research performance of medical universities in Northern Iran based on quantitative and qualitative scientometric indicators. In this cross-sectional descriptive study, the Scopus-indexed scientific documents provided by medical universities in the Northern Iran have been studied in terms of number of publications, number of citations, average number of Citations per Publication (C/P), Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI), scientific collaborations, the number of in top 10% citation percentile, and the number of publications in top 10% journal percentile according to CiteScore, Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), and SCImagoJournal Rank (SJR) indicators during a five years period. According to the findings, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences has gained the highest position in terms of the number of publications and citations, number of publications with international and national collaborations, and  academic-industrial collaborations., while Golestan University of Medical Sciences has gained a higher position in terms of scientific outputs in top 10% citation percentile and journal percentile, CiteScore, SNIP, SJR and C/P. In terms of the FWCI indicator, Golestan University of Medical Sciences has achieved the highest value. Considering academic status and research capabilities of medical universities in the Northern Iran, increasing academic-industrial collaboration, expanding academic collaboration with superior universities and institutions around the world can be effective in increasing the quality of research and upgrading academic ranks of universities at national, regional and international levels.

The number of research publications, patents, and H-index values of each country in pharmacy related fields, could be used as scientometric indicators of pharmacy research and education. For this purpose we studied above mentioned factors for 102 counties consisting of; twenty finance ministers and central bank governors, European Union member countries, first twenty countries of the world in Human Development indices, Middle East countries, and members of Organization of the Islamic Conference. Scopus® was used to extract the bibliometric data. The correlation of some factors such as economical, educational, and research and development (R&D) indicators of the countries on the studied parameters were investigated. The results of analyses showed that studied indicators are correlated with the number of publications, H-indices, and patents. This might suggest the possibility of the further researches in the field of mathematical representation in scientometrics. Research and development in pharmacy areas are affected by expenditure and the more the expenditure, the more the outcome of research and development.

Gender differences in scientometric indicators among medical faculty members in Iran was investigated.

The Research performance of the faculty at all universities and institutes of medical sciences in Iran was assessed using the Iranian Scientometric Information Database (ISID) on June 12, 2021. Selected variables in our study were name, gender, university, degree, academic rank, type of faculty, the total number of articles, the total number of citations, self-citation percentage, h-index, citation per article, international cooperation percentage, and the number of research collaborators. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used. The extracted data were analyzed using R v4.0.1 statistical software.

A total of 21064 faculty members in 77 universities and institutes of medical sciences were registered in the ISID database, of which 12093 (57.4%) were men. Men faculty members outnumbered women in all academic ranks, except for the “instructor” rank (1134 female instructors against 835 male). In both sexes, most faculty members were assistant professors. There were more articles (346837 vs. 146024) and citations (5177060 vs. 1639246) by men than women. Among the 1789 faculty members with zero articles, 902 (50.4%) were men. One-hundred-and-fifty-four people were among ESIchr('39')s top researcherschr('39') list, with a majority of men (124 people equal to 80.5%). The medians of all the scientometric indicators were higher in men than women. Men had a higher number of articles, the number of citations, h-index, citation per article, percentage of international articles, and co-authors, however, women had lower self-citations (1.56% vs. 2.51%). In all academic ranks, men had higher scientometric indicators. The only exception was the associate professors’ self-citation, in which women’s citations were higher than that of men (3.5 vs. 3.3). The highest mean h-index was in men with a Ph.D. in Pharmacy (13), men with a Ph.D. by Research (12) and women with a Ph.D. by Research (8.5), respectively.

Gender differences were evident in research performance in Iran. Women faculty members of medical sciences in Iran generally had lower scientometric indicators.

The current research tries to investigate the position of Iran in regional and global research of epidemiology.
To conduct this applied research, scientometric indicators were utilized. The study population comprised 53300 papers published by different countries during 2011 to 2015 indexed in Scopus database.
The results of the study revealed that Iranian Epidemiology researchers published 1196 international articles, making Iran the 16th country in the world and the first country in the Middle East region. Investigating the publication output of institutions showed that seven out of top ten institutions in the Middle East were from Iran. Iranian publications received 3.9 citations on average, while the mean number of citations for regional and global publications was 5.3 and 7.4, respectively. Moreover, the scientific output of Iranian researchers in epidemiology had a lower quality compared to the region and the world, based on three indicators: citedness rate, percentage of highly cited papers, and field-weighted citation impact.
Despite the notable position of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the quantity of the research output in epidemiology, the quality of these publications is relatively low in comparison with regional and global average.

Scientometrics are used to quantify scientific activities. Generally quantification of scientific activities is measurable by producing statistics on scientific publications indexed in indicator databases such as SCOPUS and ISI. Scientometric data can be useful to measure research collaborations among scientific environments and to monitor the evolution of special scientific subjects and fields. Also decision and policy-makers are going to be interested in scientometric indicators. In developed countries, there are flexible tools used to study the scientific phenomena of countries associated with scientific communities, to conduct scientific/strategic, technical, technological or competitive monitoring, to design and manage research programs and to evaluate research. Also in these countries, clear scientometric tools are available and can be used to measure and compare the scientific activities at various levels of aggregation including institutions, sectors, provinces and etc. The progress of the scientific activities of developing country is not clear due to turbidity of science and technology importance and indicators; therefore, survey about science and technology indicators at scientific environment of country could not offer a clear and certain view to scientometrician without the updated information on science and technology indicators. Science and technology indicators are based on the publication performance of each country in different science and technology fields; therefore it looks like that 'native indicators are essential of detection of our country situation on scientometry'.