Innovative Research Award
M. Ali Nasseri Β· Technical University of Munich Β· Germany
Innovative Research Award is the title of this academic recognition profile concerning M. Ali Nasseri, whose supplied researcher information associates him with the Technical University of Munich in Germany and the subject area of Medicine and Health Sciences. The profile presents the bibliometric indicators provided for the researcher and outlines considerations relevant to evaluating research contributions in the context of the International Research Hypothesis Excellence Award. The information should be checked against authoritative researcher records before being used for formal recognition or bibliometric comparisons.[1][2]
Abstract
This article presents an academic recognition profile for M. Ali Nasseri in the context of the Innovative Research Award and the International Research Hypothesis Excellence Award. The supplied profile data lists 78 documents, 1,160 citations, and an h-index of 19, with Medicine and Health Sciences identified as the relevant subject area. These bibliometric values provide a quantitative starting point for describing research output and citation activity. However, the figures alone do not establish the originality, methodological quality, clinical relevance, or practical impact of individual studies. A comprehensive assessment would also require examination of verified publications, research methods, scholarly contributions, and independent evaluation criteria.[1][3]
Keywords
Innovative Research Award; M. Ali Nasseri; Medicine and Health Sciences; research evaluation; bibliometrics; citation analysis; h-index; scholarly publications; research impact; International Research Hypothesis Excellence Award; academic recognition; scientific innovation.
Introduction
Research recognition programs provide a framework for identifying and acknowledging scholarly contributions across scientific disciplines. In medicine and health sciences, meaningful evaluation can involve the originality of research questions, the robustness of study design, the reproducibility of findings, ethical research practices, and the potential contribution of results to clinical or public health knowledge. Bibliometric measures can support this process, but they should be interpreted alongside qualitative evidence and the context in which the research was produced.[3][4]
This profile organizes the supplied information about M. Ali Nasseri into a structured academic overview. It is intended as a presentation of researcher information and award-related considerations, rather than an independently verified biography or an announcement that an award has been granted. Researcher identities, institutional affiliations, publication records, and award outcomes should be confirmed through their respective authoritative sources before publication.
Research Profile
The supplied information identifies M. Ali Nasseri with the Technical University of Munich in Germany and associates the profile with Medicine and Health Sciences. It reports 78 documents, 1,160 citations, and an h-index of 19. These values are presented as user-provided figures and have not been independently verified for this article. Researcher databases may display different values depending on author disambiguation, database coverage, document types, citation-update dates, and profile-merging practices.[1][2]
The supplied ORCID identifier is 0000-0002-9764-5731. ORCID provides persistent researcher identifiers that can help distinguish scholars with similar names and connect them to their research outputs. An ORCID record may contain information entered by the researcher or added through authorized integrations; its contents should therefore be reviewed directly when verifying a person’s biography, affiliations, and publications.[2]
Research Contributions
Assessing a researcher’s contributions requires examining the substance of their scholarly work, including the questions investigated, the methods applied, the reliability of the findings, and the relevance of the results to the wider research community. In medicine and health sciences, additional considerations may include clinical significance, patient safety, ethical oversight, transparent reporting, and the extent to which findings can be reproduced or translated into practice.[3][4]
The supplied profile does not include a verified publication list, individual study titles, abstracts, or a detailed research statement. Accordingly, specific discoveries, clinical advances, inventions, or methodological innovations cannot be attributed to M. Ali Nasseri on the basis of the available information alone. A reliable account of research contributions should be prepared after reviewing the researcher’s verified publications and relevant supporting evidence.
Publications
The supplied Scopus profile information reports 78 documents. This figure is included as provided and should not be treated as a confirmed current total until the linked author record has been checked. A document count may include different publication types, and a researcher’s database profile may contain records that require author-level verification to distinguish their own work from that of other researchers with similar names.[1]
A publication list suitable for an academic recognition profile should include verified bibliographic details, such as author names, article title, journal or conference title, year of publication, volume and issue where applicable, page range or article number, and DOI when available. Publications should be selected for relevance and evidentiary value rather than solely for citation frequency. No individual publication titles or DOI identifiers have been supplied for this profile, so specific articles cannot be listed reliably here.
For additional verification, the researcher’s Scopus record and ORCID profile may be consulted through the external links below. The Scopus identifier in the supplied infobox is 55849349900, while the provided profile URL contains a different author identifier, 55322962400, in its displayed link text. This discrepancy should be resolved before publication to ensure that the correct author record is linked. The URL used in this article follows the identifier 55849349900 supplied for the profile.
Research Impact
The supplied bibliometric figures are 1,160 citations and an h-index of 19 across 78 documents. The h-index is a citation-based indicator that combines publication output with citation frequency: a value of 19 generally means that at least 19 indexed publications have each received at least 19 citations within the database and at the time of measurement. The indicator does not directly measure methodological quality, originality, societal value, or the clinical importance of research.[5]
Citation counts can vary across scholarly databases because each service indexes different journals, proceedings, books, and other research outputs. They can also change over time as new publications are indexed and citation records are updated. For a fair assessment, the database, retrieval date, author identity, and calculation method should be documented. Quantitative indicators should be interpreted alongside expert assessment and evidence of the researcher’s actual contributions.[3][5]
Research impact may extend beyond citations to include changes in professional practice, contributions to clinical guidance, data and software resources, interdisciplinary collaboration, public health outcomes, and knowledge dissemination. These dimensions require appropriate evidence and should not be inferred from citation metrics alone.
Award Suitability
The International Research Hypothesis Excellence Award is the event identified for this profile. The supplied information provides a basis for organizing the researcher’s stated bibliometric indicators within an academic recognition page. However, these figures alone are not sufficient to determine eligibility, establish award suitability, or confirm that the researcher has received an award.
A balanced evaluation for an innovative research award could consider the originality and significance of the research hypothesis, the quality of supporting evidence, methodological rigor, reproducibility, ethical compliance, publication record, contribution to the relevant field, and potential for advancing scientific understanding. Where applicable, reviewers may also consider translational relevance, interdisciplinary value, and documented benefits to health or society. These are general assessment considerations, not a claim about the event’s official criteria.[3][4]
Before a final award-related statement is published, the organizers’ official eligibility rules and evaluation procedures should be consulted. The candidate’s identity, affiliation, publication record, and supporting documentation should be verified, and any selection outcome should be reported only when confirmed by the award organizers. This approach distinguishes an informational research profile from a formal award announcement.
Conclusion
This academic profile summarizes the information supplied for M. Ali Nasseri, including the stated affiliation with the Technical University of Munich, the subject area of Medicine and Health Sciences, and the reported bibliometric figures of 78 documents, 1,160 citations, and an h-index of 19. These details provide a structured starting point for researcher identification and academic recognition. They should be confirmed against authoritative records before being treated as current or independently established facts.
A defensible assessment of innovative research requires more than publication and citation totals. Verified scholarly outputs, transparent methodology, originality, reproducibility, ethical standards, and demonstrable contributions to the field are important components of a comprehensive review. The profile should therefore be updated with verified publications, relevant DOI records, and confirmed award information as those details become available.
External Links
References
- Elsevier. (n.d.). Scopus Author Search and author profiles. Scopus. Consult the author record to verify the researcher’s identifier, indexed documents, citations, and h-index.
https://www.scopus.com/
- ORCID. (n.d.). ORCID: Connecting research and researchers. ORCID provides persistent identifiers that help distinguish researchers and connect them with scholarly outputs.
https://orcid.org/
- Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520, 429β431.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
- San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). (2012; subsequent updates available). Declaration on Research Assessment. DORA advocates evaluating research on its merits and avoiding overreliance on journal-based metrics.
https://sfdora.org/read/
- Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569β16572.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102