A scientometric analysis of health and population research in South Asia: focus on two research organizations

Asian University for Women, 4000, Chittagong, BANGLADESH; Antwerp University (UA), IBW, B-2000, Antwerpen, BELGIUM; KHBO (Association K.U.Leuven), Dept. of Industrial Sciences & Technology Zeedijk 101, B-8400, Oostende, BELGIUM; Dept. of Mathematics, K.U.Leuven, B-3000, Leuven (Heverlee), BELGIUM; Division of Publications & Information, Indian Council of Medical Research, INDIA
Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science (Impact Factor: 0.38). 01/2011; 15:135-147.

ABSTRACT In this article we provide a scientometric comparison between two health and population research organizations, namely the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research in Bangladesh (ICDDR,B) and the National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases (NICED) in India, during the period 1979-2008. We study these two institutes because they conduct similar research and because of their collaboration ties. Data are collected from the Web of Science (WoS) as well as from official records of these two organizations. The analysis presents the evolution of publication activities. Special attention is given to research impact through time series of the institutional h-and R-indices, as well as to the trend in yearly citations received. Types of publications, international collaboration with other countries, top scientists and most cited articles co-authored by scientists from these institutions are highlighted. It is observed that female scientists play a minor role in these two institutes.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this paper, our objective is to delineate some of the problems that could arise in using research output for performance evaluation. Research performance in terms of the Impact Factor (IF) of papers, say of scientific institutions in a country, could depend critically on coauthored papers in a situation where internationally co-authored papers are known to have significantly different (higher) impact factors as compared to purely indigenous papers. Thus, international collaboration not only serves to increase the overall output of research papers of an institution, the contribution of such papers to the average Impact Factor of the institutional output could also be disproportionately high. To quantify this effect, an index of gain in impact through foreign collaboration (GIFCOL) is defined such that it ensures comparability between institutions with differing proportions of collaborative output. A case study of major Indian institutions is undertaken, where Cluster Analysis is used to distinguish between intrinsically high performance institutions and those that gain disproportionately in terms of perceived quality of their output as a result of international collaboration.
    Scientometrics 10/2001; 52(3):379-394. · 2.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The structure of different types of time series in citation analysis is revealed, using an adapted form of the Frandsen–Rousseau notation. Special cases where this approach can be used include time series of impact factors and time series of h-indices, or h-type indices. This leads to a tool describing dynamic aspects of citation analysis. Time series of h-indices are calculated in some specific models.
    Journal of Informetrics 07/2008; · 4.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this study, a series of relative indicators are used to compare the difference in research performance in biomedical fields between ten selected Western and Asian countries. Based on Thomson’s Essential Science Indicators (ESI) 1996–2006, the output of papers and their citations in ten biomedical fields are compared at multiple levels using relative indicators. Chart diagrams and hierarchical clustering are applied to represent the data. The results confirm that there are many differences in intra- and interdisciplinary scientific activities between the West and the East. In most biomedical fields Asian countries perform below world average.
    Scientometrics 01/2009; 81:475-491. · 2.27 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Nov 25, 2014