BACKGROUND: The h-index is a commonly used metric for evaluating the publication 
performance of researchers. However, in a multidisciplinary field such as 
medical informatics, interpreting the h-index is a challenge because researchers 
tend to have diverse home disciplines, ranging from clinical areas to computer 
science, basic science, and the social sciences, each with different publication 
performance profiles.
OBJECTIVE: To construct a reference standard for interpreting the h-index of 
medical informatics researchers based on the performance of their peers.
METHODS: Using a sample of authors with articles published over the 5-year 
period 2006-2011 in the 2 top journals in medical informatics (as determined by 
impact factor), we computed their h-index using the Scopus database. Percentiles 
were computed to create a 6-level benchmark, similar in scheme to one used by 
the US National Science Foundation, and a 10-level benchmark.
RESULTS: The 2 benchmarks can be used to place medical informatics researchers 
in an ordered category based on the performance of their peers. A validation 
exercise mapped the benchmark levels to the ranks of medical informatics 
academic faculty in the United States. The 10-level benchmark tracked academic 
rank better (with no ties) and is therefore more suitable for practical use.
CONCLUSIONS: Our 10-level benchmark provides an objective basis to evaluate and 
compare the publication performance of medical informatics researchers with that 
of their peers using the h-index.