DEVELOPMENT OF METRICS FOR TECHNICAL PRODUCTION : QUALIS BOOKS AND BOOK CHAPTERS Desenvolvimento de métricas para o Qualis de produção técnica de livros e capítulos de livros

Objective: To propose metrics to qualify the publication in books and chapters, and from there, establish guidance for the evaluation of the Medicine III programs. Method: Analysis of some of the 2013 area documents focusing this issue. Were analyzed the following areas: Computer Science; Biotechnology; Biological Sciences I; Public Health; Medicine I. Results: Except for the Medicine I, which has not adopted the metric for books and chapters, all other programs established metrics within the intellectual production, although with unequal percentages. Conclusion: It ́s desirable to include metrics for books and book chapters in the intellectual production of post-graduate programs in Area Document with percentage-value of 5% in publications of Medicine III programs.


INTRODUCTION
D efined by CAPES, books are printed or electronic prod- ucts with ISBN or ISSN (for serial works) containing at least 50 pages and published by public or private publishing house, scientific association, cultural/research institution or official organization 1 .
Everyone knows that in various areas of knowledge books and their chapters are references to construct knowledge, setting styles and schools of thought.Thus, to evaluate the intellectual production in the format of books and chapters is a peculiar exercise, since there are no examples in other countries to do it.The evaluation involves singularities when compared to journals.In these, the production quality can be inferred a priori from circulation and impact indicators, recognized in consolidated bases and indexes.In the case of books and chapters, these principles are absent.The "Institute Scientific Information" -ISI -which was introduced by Eugene Garfield 2 in 1960, registers books and articles in its base; however, such records do not get proper and adequate scientometric treatment.
ISI do not register citations among books, as well as citations of articles in books; hence, assess the intellectual production program through books requires the development of specific criteria 1 .So, it's a challenge in making uniformity procedures among areas to be more objective in evaluation process and more transparent to the scientific and academic community of the Brazilian postgraduate.The evaluation done by CAPES for the production of books and chapters requires ongoing process like "Qualis Periodicals", which spent more than a decade to reach the current stage of recognition.
The objective of this paper is to propose metrics to qualify the production on books and chapters, and thus to establish guidance for the evaluation of postgraduate programs of Medicine III on these topics.This research followed the principles of the classification for books approved for the evaluation process of postgraduate programs at the CTC 2009 CAPES.
The structure also followed the document "The construction of scientific paper: a guide for projects, scientific research and reports" 3 and "Scientific methodology: how to make more pleasant the development of academic work" 4 .
This publication is the result of presentation made during As an evaluation tool for classification of books and chapters was observed the following items: 1) work identification data; 2) the formal aspects of the work, if there was the presence of teachers and students of the program, published in foreign languages, obtaining national and international awards and, also, the link to program line of research; 3) qualitative evaluation of the content, where it was observed the thematic relevance, innovation which highlights the originality of the content, with the innovative contribution to the field of surgery and also the impact of the work for its community.
For the books and chapters metrics the proposal prepared by these authors is shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3.By convention, the sum of chapters should not exceed the book's score, as well as the same author can score a maximum of two chapters in the same book.

RESULTS
The survey showed the following results: Area of evaluation: Computer Science Books and chapters were evaluated in intellectual production (Item 4 of the 2013 Area Document) without using specific evaluation guideline, according to percentages shown in Figure 4.

FIGURE 4 -Item 4 of the Computer Science Area Document 2013
Area of evaluation: Biotechnology Books and book chapters were evaluated in the intellectual production (Item 4 of the 2013 Area Document) as shown in Figure 5.

FIGURE 5 -Item 4 of the Computer Science Area Document 2013
Area of evaluation: Biological Sciences I Books and book chapters were evaluated in the intellectual production (Item 4 of the 2013 Area Document) using percentage as shown in Figure 6.

Area of evaluation: Medicine III
The proposal prepared by the authors of this article is to consider the evaluation of books and book chapters in the intellectual production as shown in Figure 8.

DISCUSSION
The production assessment is distinct from the periodic to books and chapters, because it presents singularities compared to journals.The indicators that express quality are the ones using well-defined methods and applied impartially by peers.They have universal characteristics; already on the books and chapters these characteristics are not presented 1 .
It is also known that unlike the postgraduate programs in the medical field (Medicines I, II and III) -where books and chapters are not significant and relevant production -in many others, such as Computer Science 5 , Biotecnology 6 , Biological Sciences I 7 and Public Health 8 , these types of publication are very representative in scientific production.Inspired or not in periodic

METHOD
This study was conducted at the Postgraduate Program in Principles of Surgery at the Evangelical School of Paraná and University Evangelical Hospital of Curitiba by members of its Collegiate in November 2014.
the Fifth Meeting of Postgraduate Medicine III between 8 and 9 December 2014 in São Paulo, Brazil.The material was based on the analysis of the 2013 area documents of various postgraduate programs that aimed to establish the metric for books and book chapters.The programs analyzed were in the following areas: Computer Science 5 ; Biotecnology 6 ; Biological Sciences I 7 ; Public Health 8 ; and Medicine I 9 .

FIGURE 6 -
FIGURE 6 -Item 4 of the Biological Sciences I Area Document 2013 Area Assessment: Public Health Books and book chapters were evaluated in the intellectual production (Item 4 of the 2013 Area Document) using percentage of the program as shown in Figure 7.

FIGURE 7 -
FIGURE 7 -Item 4 of the Public Health Area Document 2013 Area of evaluation: Medicine I The evaluation area of Medicine I did not adopt the metric for books and chapters because it seldom uses this type of publication.

FIGURE 8 -
FIGURE 8 -Proposition to include and evaluate books and book chapters in Item 4 of Area Document of Medicine III