In continuation of our analysis of the issues and needs in the Nigerian higher education sector, our analyst has found that Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu is All Time Most Cited Researcher in the University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu led other academics in the University after analysis of the academics with over 1, 000 citations according to the Google Scholar. The areas of specialisations of Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu include Public Health, ?Health Systems and Policy.
Analysis indicates that the average publications of the 68 academics are 127 publications out of 8,698 articles published in the last few years. As at the time of writing this analysis, average citations of the academics are 2,122 with 21.67 as the average impact. Analysis further reveals the minimum publications as 37 published by Professor J.C Ani. These publications have been cited 2,500 times. The minimum citations, according to the analysis, is 1,005. This citation is from 65 publications of Professor Chinwuba Ijoma.
Exhibit 1: Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu [in green] among others
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 16 (Feb 10 – May 3, 2025) opens registrations; register today for early bird discounts.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
Despite being the leading researcher in terms of citations in the University, Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu’s publications are not more impactful [H-index=40] as those published by Professor Obinna E. Onwujekwe [H-index 44]. The four scores ahead of 40 recorded by Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu make Professor Obinna E. Onwujekwe more impactful in the global academic community. Professor Obinna E. Onwujekwe has 371 publications with 9, 602 all time citations.
Exhibit 2: Professor Obinna E. Onwujekwe is more impactful than Professor Benjamin Uzochukwu
I found this article not properly written and metrics and method of reaching conclusion flawed. How can you say that someone with H index of 40 is not impactful because the other has 44. Instead you should use more impactful than the other, but come to think of it, in how many papers was this article cited or was the citations loaded in fewer paper than the other. I think h index excluding self citations should be a good measure of impact. Again in what quality journal or conferences were this paper cited. I think if you go for quality citations, you should check scopus (mendeley statistics) and publon citations (web of science). Most citations were in predator journals (check Bell list of predator journals) which cannot pass proper per review. So for complete analysis many metrics has to be factored into the weighting to make a minimum acceptable conclusion
While the article attempts to give insight to quality of research in the Nigerian universities, the conclusions and the associated comments however raises some questions.
Is citations and impact the only factors to consider when rating a researcher?
Is the so called Bell’s list of predatory journal an exhaustive one ? For I know a sound academic needs no list by anyone or to identify a predatory journal.
Thirdly is the sphere of specialty not also considered when doing the rating?
For a fact, very quality publications in a relatively new field may not get so much citations as a work of lesser quality in a well established sphere.
Lastly, was there any separation of the works analysed into research articles and reviews? This can equally give insight into citations. Generally, review articles get more citations as compared with research articles. Thus if one has 37 works (17 researches and 20 reviews) whereas another with same works(27 researches and 10reviews) having similar citations, which would you say has more impact?
No doubt when these questions are considered in a write-up as this, it will make it more robust and balanced.
Thank you for the comment. As a matter of fact, this piece focuses on Google scholar alone. Those metrics you suggested would be included in other forthcoming articles. We are aware of predator journals but that is not our focus in this piece. We are not saying Professor Benjamin’s citations are not impactful but it is not as what the second person had. After all, Professor Benjamin had more that 20 points required for a researcher who has been researching in the last 20 years.