Abstract Purpose This study aims to classify research impact indicators based on their characteristics and scope. A concept of evidence-based nomenclature of research impact (RI) indicator has been introduced for generalization and transformation of scope. Design/methodology/approch Literature was collected related to the research impact assessment. It was categorized in conceptual and applied case studies. One hundred and nineteen indicators were selected to prepare classification and nomenclature. The nomenclature was developed based on the principle—“every indicator is a contextual-function to explain the impact”. Every indicator was disintegrated into three parts, i.e. Function, Domain, and Target Areas. Findings The main functions of research impact indicators express improvement (63%), recognition (23%), and creation/development (14%). The focus of research impact indicators in literature is more towards the academic domain (59%) whereas the environment/sustainability domain is least considered (4%). As a result, research impact related to the research aspects is felt the most (29%). Other target areas include system and services, methods and procedures, networking, planning, policy development, economic aspects and commercialisation, etc. Research limitations This research applied to 119 research impact indicators. However, the inclusion of additional indicators may change the result. Practical implications The plausible effect of nomenclature is a better organization of indicators with appropriate tags of functions, domains, and target areas. This approach also provides a framework of indicator generalization and transformation. Therefore, similar indicators can be applied in other fields and target areas with modifications. Originality/value The development of nomenclature for research impact indicators is a novel approach in scientometrics. It is developed on the same line as presented in other scientific disciplines, where fundamental objects need to classify on common standards such as biology and chemistry.

中文翻译：

---

研究影响指标的循证命名和分类

摘要目的本研究旨在根据研究指标的特征和范围对研究指标进行分类。引入了基于证据的研究影响（RI）指标命名法的概念，用于范围的概括和转换。设计/方法论/方法收集与研究影响评估有关的文献。它分为概念研究和应用案例研究。选择了119个指标以准备分类和术语。术语的命名基于以下原则：“每个指标都是解释影响的上下文功能”。每个指标都分解为三个部分，即功能，领域和目标区域。结果研究影响指标的主要功能表示改进（63％），认可度（23％）和创造/发展（14％）。文献中研究影响指标的重点更多地放在学术领域（59％），而对环境/可持续性领域的考虑最少（4％）。结果，与研究相关的研究影响最大（29％）。其他目标领域包括系统和服务，方法和程序，网络，计划，政策制定，经济方面和商业化等。研究局限性本研究适用于119个研究影响指标。但是，包含其他指标可能会改变结果。实际含义术语的合理作用是更好地组织具有适当功能，领域和目标领域标签的指标。该方法还提供了指标概括和转换的框架。所以，经过修改，类似的指标可以应用于其他领域和目标领域。原创性/价值研究影响指标的命名法的发展是科学计量学的一种新方法。它是按照与其他科学学科相同的思路开发的，在这些学科中，基本对象需要按照生物学和化学等通用标准进行分类。