liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Who are the most highly cited forensic scientists in the United States?
Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Division of Clinical Chemistry and Pharmacology. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
2023 (English)In: Journal of Forensic Sciences, ISSN 0022-1198, E-ISSN 1556-4029, Vol. 68, no 3, p. 723-730Article in journal, Editorial material (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

The most highly cited forensic practitioners in the United States were identified using a publicly available citation database that used six different citation metrics to calculate each persons composite citation score. The publication and citation data were gleaned from Elseviers SCOPUS database, which contained information about similar to 7 million scientist each of whom had at least five entries in the database. Each individual was categorized into 22 scientific fields and 176 subfields, one of which was legal and forensic medicine (LFM). The database contained citation records for 13,388 individuals having LFM as their primary research discipline and 282 of these (2%) were classified as being highly cited. Another 99 individuals in the database had LFM as their secondary discipline, making a total of 381 highly cited forensic practitioners from 35 different countries. The career-long publication records of each individual were compared using their composite citation scores. Of the 381 highly cited scientists, 93 (24%) had an address somewhere in the United States. The various branches of forensics they specialized in were anthropology, criminalistics, DNA/genetics, odontology, pathology, statistics/epidemiology, and toxicology. The two most highly cited scientists, according to their composite citation score, were both specialists in DNA/genetics. Bibliometric methods are widely used for evaluating research performance in academia and a similar approach might be useful in jurisprudence, such as when an expert witness is instructed to testify in court and explain the meaning of scientific evidence.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
WILEY , 2023. Vol. 68, no 3, p. 723-730
Keywords [en]
authorship; bibliometrics; citation analysis; expert testimony; forensics; jurisprudence; litigation; scientific journals
National Category
Forensic Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-193016DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.15231ISI: 000952803200001PubMedID: 36929594OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-193016DiVA, id: diva2:1750508
Available from: 2023-04-13 Created: 2023-04-13 Last updated: 2024-04-11

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jones, A Wayne
By organisation
Division of Clinical Chemistry and PharmacologyFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Forensic Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 36 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf