Scientific productivity is often evaluated by means of cumulative citation metrics. Different metrics produce different incentives. The H-index assigns full credit from a citation to each coauthor, and thus may encourage multiple collaborations in mid-list author roles. In contrast, the Hm-index assigns only a fraction 1/k of citation credit to each of k coauthors of an article, and thus may encourage research done by smaller teams, and in first or last author roles. Whether H and Hm indices are influenced by different authorship patterns has not been examined. Using a publicly available Scopus database, I examined associations between the numbers of research articles published as single, first, mid-list, or last author between 1990 and 2019, and the H-index and the Hm-index, among 18,231 leading researchers in the health sciences. Adjusting for career duration and other article types, the H-index was negatively associated with the number of single author articles (partial Pearson r -0.06) and first author articles (-0.08), but positively associated with the number of mid-list (0.64) and last author articles (0.21). In contrast, all associations were positive for the Hm-index (0.04 for single author articles, 0.18 for first author articles, 0.24 for mid-list articles, and 0.46 for last author articles). The H-index and the Hm-index do not reflect the same authorship patterns: the full-credit H-index is predominantly associated with mid-list authorship, whereas the partial-credit Hm-index is driven by more balanced publication patterns, and is most strongly associated with last-author articles. Since performance metrics may act as incentives, the selection of a citation metric should receive careful consideration.

中文翻译：

---

高被引生物医学研究人员的作者身份和引用模式：一项横断面研究

科学生产力通常通过累积引用指标来评估。不同的指标产生不同的激励。H 指数将引用的全部学分分配给每位合著者，因此可能会鼓励中间作者角色的多次合作。相比之下，Hm 索引仅将 1/k 的引用学分分配给一篇文章的 k 个共同作者中的每一个，因此可能会鼓励较小的团队以及第一作者或最后作者角色进行的研究。H 和 Hm 指数是否受到不同作者模式的影响尚未得到检验。我使用公开可用的 Scopus 数据库，研究了 1990 年至 2019 年间作为单一作者、第一作者、中间作者或最后作者发表的研究论文数量与 H 指数和 Hm 指数之间的关联，这些研究文章涉及 18,231 名领先研究人员。健康科学。调整职业持续时间和其他文章类型后，H 指数与单作者文章数量（部分 Pearson r -0.06）和第一作者文章数量（-0.08）呈负相关，但与中间列表的数量（ 0.64）和最后作者的文章（0.21）。相比之下，所有关联的 Hm 指数均为正相关（单作者文章为 0.04，第一作者文章为 0.18，中间列表文章为 0.24，最后作者文章为 0.46）。H 指数和 Hm 指数并不反映相同的作者模式：全学分 H 指数主要与中等列表作者相关，而部分学分 Hm 指数则由更平衡的出版模式驱动，并且与最后作者的文章最密切相关。由于绩效指标可以起到激励作用，因此引用指标的选择应该经过仔细考虑。