No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Bibliometric patterns and indicators of research collaboration of Egyptian health scientists: 1980 – 2014
Abstract
The present study examines Egyptian publications and research collaboration in health sciences using Thomson Reuters InCites TM over the period of 1980-2014. Egypt, in clinical, pre-clinical and health, is ranked 44 among all countries according to the Web of Science documents (quantity) and total citations (quality). It is ranked at 40 and 55 respectively for international collaboration and the total number of highly cited papers. The total publications of Egyptian scientists in health sciences were 31 382, of which 27 693 articles were multi-authored, indicating a co-authorship ratio of 88 percent. It reveals that Egyptian scientists have a great tendency to collaborate. The collaborated papers show a greater citation impact, category normalized citation impact, and journal normalized citation impact and h-index compared to single authored papers. This reveals that the visibility and impact of co-authored papers are higher than that of single authored ones, as well as the visibility and impact of internationally co-authored publications are higher than the single authored or domestic papers. Egyptian scientists, in clinical, pre-clinical and health, had joint publications with their colleagues in 166 countries during the period under study. These countries were grouped according to geographic position, scientific capacity and economic development rate. The results show that Egypt's main partners were USA, Saudi Arabia, Germany, England and Japan. In addition, Egyptian researchers mostly co-published with colleagues in Europe, scientifically advanced countries and high income countries. The findings could inform policy makers to develop research policies aiming to foster and support collaborations at all levels-researchers, institutions and countries.
... The articles explored the IRC profile of regions (e.g., Boshoff, 2009Boshoff, , 2010Landini et al., 2015), (Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017). The African countries collaborated the most with scientifically advanced and high-income countries (Boshoff, 2009(Boshoff, , 2010Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017;Sooryamoorthy, 2009). ...
... The articles explored the IRC profile of regions (e.g., Boshoff, 2009Boshoff, , 2010Landini et al., 2015), (Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017). The African countries collaborated the most with scientifically advanced and high-income countries (Boshoff, 2009(Boshoff, , 2010Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017;Sooryamoorthy, 2009). ...
... Regarding research performance, the publications with the joint contribution of African and non-African scientists have a higher impact (as measured by the number of citations) than those solely authored by African scientists (e.g., Monge-Najera et al., 2020;Onyancha, 2018;Sooryamoorthy, 2017). The documents in journals with high impact as well as dissertations (e.g., Hampton & Sweijd, 2008;Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017) are also cited as benefits from collaborative research. ...
It is widely recognised that science in Africa will benefit from international research collaboration (IRC), and therefore studies have been done on IRC in Africa (hereafter: Africa-related IRC research). However, there is no information on the development of Africa-related IRC research, the geographical location of the scientists interested in the topic, the visibility of the literature and the themes researched. This information makes it possible to understand relevant aspects in the context of IRC in Africa, which are useful for identifying IRC strengths, weaknesses and opportunities. It also allows paving the way for future research on this topic. Using discipline–specific terms, bibliometric, and thematic analysis, I collected the literature on Africa-related IRC research indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS). The results showed that the number of publications on the topic has increased, few African countries have researched the topic, a third of the publications were written exclusively by African scientists, and the topic has high visibility. The panoply of publications revealed that patterns, driving factors, effects, networks, asymmetries, and policies concerning IRC were the main themes researched.
... The increasing number of publications involving non-African scientists and the high proportion of these publications in the total number of African publications are well documented in the literature on IRC patterns. In addition to the spatial distribution of collaborators, other studies have disaggregated African countries' collaborators by their countries' scientific capacity and economic development (Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017). African countries collaborated most frequently with scientifically advanced and high-income countries (Boshoff, 2009(Boshoff, , 2010Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017;Sooryamoorthy, 2009). ...
... In addition to the spatial distribution of collaborators, other studies have disaggregated African countries' collaborators by their countries' scientific capacity and economic development (Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017). African countries collaborated most frequently with scientifically advanced and high-income countries (Boshoff, 2009(Boshoff, , 2010Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017;Sooryamoorthy, 2009). ...
... Documents in high-impact journals and dissertations are also cited as benefits of collaborative research (e.g. Hampton & Sweijd, 2008;Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017). ...
In Africa, the production of scientific knowledge in an international context has been widely studied over time. However, the existing literature lacks a deeper understanding of the integration of African countries into international networks at the global level. This enables the identification of strengths, weaknesses and opportunities of African countries in scientific production. Thus, we looked at the dynamics of international research collaboration (IRC) of African countries from the perspective of the evolution of IRC, the presence of African countries in international research networks, and the collaboration networks among African countries. We examined these perspectives through the co-publications in Natural Sciences (NS), Engineering and Technology (E&T), Medical and Health Sciences (M&HS), Agricultural Sciences (AS) and Social Sciences and Humanities (SS&H) over three periods (1990–1999, 2000–2009, 2010–2018). The study revealed the continuous integration of African countries into global networks, although this integration is higher in NS and M&HS. Today, African countries can contribute more to the exchange and creation of knowledge at the international level, and they have more opportunities for boosting their research networks, exchanging information, and exploring new scientific problems. Nevertheless, most African countries occupy a fragile position in these networks, especially in E&T, AS and SS&H. Concerning IRC between and within African regions, the results indicated weak inter/intraregional integration, especially in E&T, AS and SS&H.
... The first academic journal dedicated to Islamic finance was launched in 1983 by King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia and was followed by a similar publication from the Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI), which is also located in Saudi Arabia. To date, a number of studies have been carried out on the subject of Islamic finance; some of these studies have focused on bibliometric analysis of Islamic finance literature (Al-Jarhi, 2016;Lone, 2016;Shehatta and Mahmood, 2017;Firmansyah and Faisal, 2019;Rahman et al., 2020). The bibliometric studies are largely related to Islamic banking and finance, Á sukūk literature, PhD dissertations and Islamic economics literature. ...
... it enables an overview of the scientific literature; it provides a critical and objective summary of selected scientific papers; and it entails analysis of data that may have more relevance than subjective analyzes (Andrés, 2009;Shehatta and Mahmood, 2017). ...
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to provide quantitative information on the growth of Islamic finance literature. The study focused on publishing trends, countries producing research on Islamic finance, key authors, major contributing organizations, authorship patterns, keywords and articles with the highest citations.
Design/methodology/approach
Bibliometric analysis is applied to analyse the growth and publishing trends in Islamic finance literature. The Web of Science (WoS) database was used to extract bibliometric data covering the period 1939–2019 for Islamic finance literature.
Findings
The study finds that Islamic finance research has gained remarkable momentum in the literature. However, such growth is largely manifested in Malaysia because of a conducive atmosphere for this type of research. Interestingly, the study finds that the three most productive journals are located in the UK and Malaysia, while Professor M. Kabir Hassan from the University of New Orleans, the USA appears to head the list of authors with 23 publications on Islamic finance.
Practical implications
This study provides up-to-date literature on the current state of Islamic finance in the world; as a result, it supports the development of policies by the Islamic finance industry. The findings of the study also serve as a reference point for Islamic finance training and educational institutions.
Originality/value
Islamic finance is an emerging financial discipline; as such, there is a need for more awareness of this financial system in the world. Muslim-majority countries, especially Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Indonesia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Pakistan and Bahrain, have to include Islamic finance in their curriculum and establish research institutions and research journals. In addition, Arabic language journals should be indexed in WoS and/or Scopus to provide a high-quality publication platform. This study provides a more comprehensive bibliometric analysis on the growth of Islamic finance literature (1939–2019) in the WoS database; most of the prior studies have covered relatively few areas of focus and a lower range of years in some cases.
... Bibliometric analysis involves a combination of statistics and mathematics in the assessment of scholarly published research. 6 It is frequently used to measure the research output of an institution, 7 a country, 8,9 or a region. 10 It can also be used to evaluate different parameters of research published in a specific journal. ...
... 11 This kind of analysis presents a quantitative portrait of research performance and local and international collaboration, highlights the prevailing trends, indicates strong and weak areas of research, and provides new guidelines for researchers and policy makers. 8,9 Many studies in this area have yielded valuable insights. One such study on biomedical research in Saudi Arabia covered the period of 19 A study on pharmaceutical research in Saudi Arabia reported that 1386 papers were published during the ten years from 2001-2010 with an average annual growth rate of 14.21%. ...
The purpose of this study was to analyze the published research on health sciences carried out by researchers in Saudi Arabia in the last decade by assessing bibliometric output. Data for 2008 to 2017 was retrieved from Scopus. During this period, there was significant growth, from 1332 publications in 2008 to 5529 in 2017, with an average annual growth rate of 14.1%. King Saud University was the most productive institution. Most of the published research was done in collaboration with Egypt. The subject area of medicine was predominant with the main publication source being the Saudi Medical Journal, Life Science Journal, the Acta Zhengzhou University Oversea Version, and the Annals of Saudi Medicine, primarily in the form of original research articles. The growing trend in publications is a sign of the increasing quality of education and more research and development activities, which are made possible by a sufficient budget allocation to these activities during the last decade.
... Usually, the availability of these resources is related to the economic development of each country (Sokolov-Mladenovic et al., 2016;Wagner et al., 2001). Therefore, we expect joint research between countries with different levels of development (e.g., Maleka et al., 2019;Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017). However, the greater the economic disparity, the greater the challenges associated with research collaboration among countries, which could limit collaborative activities. ...
International research collaboration (IRC) has been relevant for the development of national scientific systems. In Africa, given the limited resources devoted to research and development (R&D) activities and the crucial role that scientific knowledge generated through research activities can have in socioeconomic development, IRC may be an opportunity to strengthen scientific capabilities. While geographical, economic, political/governance, cultural, intellectual and excellence distance hampers IRC in other regions, we argue that economic and excellence distances actuate differently in Africa. We explored the impact of the variables above in addition to the information and communication technologies (ICTs), and social distances on the IRC of these countries. Using panel data for 54 African economies, our results show that economic distance fosters IRC while governance and excellence distances are non-significant. Past collaborations (one out of two proxies for social distance) and speaking the same language have the highest effect on IRC, and ICTs distance the lowest. The results have implications for science policy in Africa. For instance, we argue that science policies need to be adapted to each environment as the scientific landscape in each country is unique.
... From Egypt, across the broader health sciences literature published between 1980-2014, it is reported that more papers involved collaboration with local coauthors than with international coauthors. However, international collaborators were more likely to be from high-income and scientifically advanced settings than from elsewhere in the GS, and internationally coauthored papers had higher citation metrics than single-author or locally authored publications [90]. Strengthening promising GS institutions should ideally be linked to strengthening capacity in weaker GS institutions in the least developed contexts. ...
Background
Strong Global South (GS) health research leadership, itself both dependent on and a requisite for strong health research systems, is essential to generate locally relevant research and ensure that evidence is translated into policy and practice. Strong GS health research systems and leadership are important for health development and in turn for strong health systems. However, many GS countries struggle to produce research and to improve performance on widely used research metrics measuring productivity and reflecting leadership. Drawing on literature from a rapid review, this viewpoint paper considers the barriers to GS health research leadership and proposes strategies to address these challenges.
Findings
GS researchers and institutions face numerous barriers that undermine health research leadership potential. Barriers internal to the GS include researcher-level barriers such as insufficient mentorship, limited financial incentives and time constraints. Institutional barriers include limited availability of resources, restrictive and poorly developed research infrastructures, weak collaboration and obstructive policies and procedures. Structural barriers include political will, politicization of research and political instability. External barriers relate to the nature and extent of Global North (GN) activities and systems and include allocation and distribution of funding and resources, characteristics and focus of GN-GS research collaborations, and publication and information dissemination challenges.
Conclusions
Strengthening GS health research leadership requires acknowledgement of the many barriers, and adoption of mitigating measures by a range of actors at the institutional, national, regional and global levels. Particularly important are leadership capacity development integrating researcher, institutional and systems initiatives; new GN–GS partnership models emphasizing capacity exchange and shared leadership; supporting GS research communities to set, own and drive their research agendas; addressing biases against GS researchers; ensuring that GS institutions address their internal challenges; enhancing South–South collaborations; diversifying research funding flow to the GS; and learning from models that work. The time has come for a firm commitment to improving localization of research leadership, supported by adequate funding flow, to ensure strong and sustainable research systems and leadership in and from the GS. Just as the humanitarian donor and aid community adopted the Grand Bargain commitment to improve funding flow through local and national responders in times of crisis, we strongly urge the global health research community to adopt a Grand Bargain for research leadership.
... There is a need for more researches on correlating global rankings' results to enhance our knowledge, understanding, and learning. Therefore, this study is one of our continued work, and research focuses on global university rankings (Shehatta and Mahmood 2016a, 2016b& 2017. The aim of the present work is fourfold: 1) to understand the connection between ranking results of two different methodological approaches: web-dependent & web-independent indicators, 2) to figure out the feasibility and benefit of using WR to assess universities' academic performance, 3) to define the consistency degree among the 2015 results for Top 100 of the seven world rankings, and 4) to suggest a set of recommendations to improve Webometrics ranking of the institutions. ...
Global university rankings continue to gain growing interest and have high visibility from all stakeholders. Of these, Webometrics Ranking (WR) faces many criticisms about its function. Some people believe WR evaluates only the websites of universities but not their global performance and impact as mentioned by WR authors. This stimulates us to examine the idea of using WR as a reliable academic ranking for the world universities. To test this hypothesis, we apply the WR results with two widely accepted indexes, i.e., the global university rankings and the bibliometrics. Therefore, the WR ranking of the Top 100 institutions are correlated with the corresponding values of six world ranking systems’ 2015 edition (ARWU, USNWR, QS, THE, NTU and URAP) that commonly accepted to evaluate the academic performance of the university, as well as with the objectively bibliometric indicators gathered from the Web of Science (WOS) InCitesTM - Thomson Reuters. The findings revealed that the WR results provide a good correlation with both ranking systems’ results and with 12 bibliometric variables namely: WOS Documents, Times Cited, Citation Impact (CI), Citation Impact: Category Normalized (CNCI), Citation Impact: Journal Normalized (JNCI), Impact Relative to World, % of Top 1% Documents, % of Top 10% Documents, Highly Cited Papers, h-index, International Collaborations, and % Industry Collaborations. The consistency between WR and the studied six rankings increases with increasing the weight percent of the research or bibliometric indicators in these six global rankings. Moreover, the consistency between WR and survey-based rankings (USNWR, THE and QS) increases with decreasing the weight of the subjective reputation survey indicators. The North American, especially USA universities are characterized by the extremely high visibility in WR as well as in the studied seven global rankings. Thus, web-based indicators ranking (WR) offers results of comparable and similar quality to those of the six major global university rankings. Accordingly, they have the capability to rank institutional academic performance. Moreover, the reliability could be enhanced if each university has only one web-domain that accurately reflects its actual performance and activity. We recommend all institutions to apply all ranking systems together since their criteria and indicators complement each other and can form a comprehensive index for covering various HEIs activities/functions worldwide.
... It was observed that British occupational therapy authors have contributed to the existing scholarly literature in the field. (Shehatta & Mahmood, 2017) explored the research collaboration patterns of Egyptian health researches. The study observed that Egyptian authors in health sciences have tendency to collaborate. ...
This study evaluates the research performance of King Edward Medical University, the oldest school of medical education in Pakistan. Bibliometric indicators are used to assess the research output. A comparison is made with peer universities running under the same government to know King Edward Medical University's research standing at the provincial and country level. The study observes the citation patterns of research publications. The study revealed that researchers in KEMU collaborate with local and international institutes. The highest collaboration is seen with the researchers in Mayo Hospital, Lahore. International research collaboration spans over seventy countries. The trend of publishing in open access journals is not very common in researchers of KEMU and other studied universities. The highest percentage of 25 % of its research papers published in open access journals is recorded by University of Health Sciences. Further, the researchers opt to publish their research in locally published journals more frequently. The study recommends publishing in good quality journals that are indexed in international indexing databases.
... International collaboration indices showed that Nigeria co-authorship ratio is 67% but much lower than co-authorship of Saudi's publications (81.1%) and Egyptian publications (88.0%) (Shehatta and Mahmood, 2016;Shehatta and Mahmood, 2017). The first evidence of international collaboration was 1951 -1960 period, as low as 3.1% collaborated publications were recorded. ...
A bibliometric analysis of Nigerian publications indexed in Scopus database over a 115-year period, 1901 to 2016 was carried out. The study elucidated Nigerian research performance, publication trends, publications patterns and collaboration patterns at national and international levels. A total of 95,304 publications were analysed with underlying bibliometric indicators and statistics. Results show a steady increase in Nigerian publications after independence; predominant article publications compared to conference papers and reviews as well as frequent collaboration within the country when compared to outside the country; and that most research publications in Nigeria emanate from universities. It is therefore suggested that there is need for more research activities and collaboration within and especially outside the country to enhance effective research productivity.
... 13 Another similar study examined research publications during and after an outbreak of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in the KSA during 2013-2014. 14 Yet another bibliometric study 15 presented useful findings regarding research collaboration and publication patterns of Egyptian health scientists. ...
Objective:
To review the dynamics of neuroscience research in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) from 2013-2018.
Methods:
Subject category of Neuroscience was selected in the SciVal feature of Scopus database, which includes all relevant categories of the field limiting it to Saudi Arabia.
Results:
Saudi Arabia is ranked 39th in publishing neuroscientific research worldwide. The number of yearly published articles has increased from 123 to 332 during the time period between 2013 and 2018. King Saud University & King Abdul Aziz University & their corresponding regions namely Western and Central regions are the major contributors to publications. Neuroscientists working in Saudi Arabia have collaboration with scientists from all over the world. The top 10 preferred journals are all international. In subcategories of neuroscience, developmental neuroscience seems the one that needs attention.
Conclusion:
Neuroscience research is on the rise in KSA. Older and well-established institutions like King Saud University & King Abdul Aziz University have taken lead in publishing neuroscientific research. International collaboration in all subfields of neuroscience is substantial. Eastern Southern and Northern regions and developmental neuroscience require more focus and funding.
Being cited by policy documents is an important indicator for assessing the policy impact of research. The purpose of this paper was to examine the associations between an article's scientific collaborations and its citations received from policy documents. Research articles published between 2000 and 2018 in 86 journals under the category of “Information Science & Library Science” (LIS) in Journal Citation Reports 2020 were selected as the data sample (n = 40,137). The metadata of the articles was extracted from the Web of Science. The outcome variable of this study, policy citations of each article, were obtained from Overton (one of the largest policy citation databases). Standard negative binomial regression models and zero-inflated negative binomial regression models were conducted to examine the dataset. Linear regression models and six selected LIS journals were used to check the robustness of the results. The results revealed that the number of countries had significant and positive associations with policy citations (p < 0.001), the number of authors and the number of affiliations had no significant associations with policy citations, while controlling the other variables.
Scientific research in the field of healthcare contributes to solving not only medical but also economic and social issues. One of the latest trends is the growing interest in evaluating the effectiveness of research conducted. In the current study, we have hypothesized that science contributes to the reduction of the Cancer Mortality Rate (CMR) by making awareness about and bringing attention to this disease. The purpose of our investigation is to study the possible correlation between five scientometric indicators (Web of Science Documents, International Collaborations, etc.) and CMR changes for 14 countries. Furthermore, the expenditures of GDP in both science and healthcare for each of the studied countries have been considered within the framework of cancer-science relations in order to find out the possible socioeconomic impact on cancer incidence. Methodologically, the study relies on the principles of scientometric management. The research data were retrieved from Web of Science and the World Health Organization for the period from 1997 to 2017. To investigate the correlation between scientific research and the CMR, we have used bibliometric data and nonparametric statistical methods (the Kruskal-Wallis test, Spearman's correlation coefficient) as well as the Dunn test of multiple group checks and the Shapiro-Wilk test. R language, Tidyverse package R and VOSviewer were used for data processing. The research results showed that during the period in question there was an increase in the CMR in Armenia and Georgia, while in Iran and Azerbaijan it remained almost consistent. For the rest of the countries from Asia and Europe, as well as Canada and the USA, the CMR experienced a downward trend. We have found close links between scientometric data, the CMR and economic costs for Europe and the USA. At the same time, for Armenia and neighbouring countries the correlation between the CMR and GDP was weak. Moreover, GDP costs incurred in healthcare and science did not have a positive effect on the CMR in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. This indicates that scientific and socioeconomic factors are highly correlated with each other and, therefore, have a positive impact on the CMR, mainly in Europe and the USA. However, the science-health relationship in Armenia is still weak and requires efforts to prevent the continued rise in CMR levels. The findings of this study can also be applied to other fields of science and help to establish close links between scientometrics and various branches of medicine. For citation: Sargsyan Sh.A., Hakobyan P.M., Shushanyan R.A., Mirzoyan A.R., BlagininV.A. (2022). The role of socioeconomic and scientometric indicators in the cancer mortality rate.
The governments of most ‘emerging market’ (EM) countries (e.g., India, Mexico, and Brazil) have invested significantly in scientific research over the past decades. These investments are reflected in the countries’ research volume, impact, and international collaboration activities. The EMs’ research support justification delivers the need to evaluate their research performance at multi-levels (country, institution, and scholar), e.g., by using indicators of research application inclinations. Bibliometric studies are increasingly requested by research and development (R&D) policymakers, funding agencies, and other relevant actors in these countries. The results of the studies are used to develop research directions, set research policies, and satisfy management needs (at universities). In this paper, we review the contributions of previous (bibliometric) studies to measuring research performance in EM countries. We identified 132 indicators used in the studies and classified them into three categories: productivity, impact, and collaboration. Some indicators have been more frequently used than others for measuring the performance of EM countries. These indicators might be the most important ones. For example, research leadership indicators (focusing on corresponding authors of publications) might be more important than other indicators measuring the research productivity of EM countries since they highlight the ‘actual’ contribution of national scientists. Collaboration indicators measuring national/international collaborative publications are also especially relevant for EM countries; their results can be used to sharpen expertise and exchange of professional knowledge. The overview presented in this paper can be used for the planning and realization of future studies on research in EM countries.
The Arab World, a regional block of 22 countries, has been the epicenter of knowledge and innovation for many centuries. After the gap and neglect of centuries, the region is undergoing reforms that would increase scientific activities. Using the InCites tool of Clarivate Analytics, this study used bibliometric indicators of research impact and productivity to present the dynamics of the Arab World’s research published between 1980 and 2020. The findings disclose that the first two decades of the 21st century witnessed a significant increase in research productivity in the region consistent with the Arab World’s recent initiatives to promote scientific research. Saudi publications attracted the highest number of citations. Almost half of the region’s research has collaborated internationally. The region performed better than the world in several indicators like citation impact, impact factor publications, and international collaborations; however, the region’s performance lags behind the world in academic-industry collaborations and publications in Q1 journals and impact relative to the world indicators. The study recommends adopting the open access model of publishing for increased visibility and impact based on the findings. Increased attention is needed in the region to enhance research linkages between universities and industry.
HIV/AIDS is the leading cause of death by infectious diseases in China, a country with the largest population in the world. China has made great efforts and progress in studying, treating, and controlling HIV/AIDS in the past 15 years. This situation calls the need for systematic analysis of the status and capability of China in the global HIV/AIDS research. It will facilitate the world to integrate and utilize resources from China infighting against the disease. A bibliometric analysis in HIV/AIDS research of China was conducted for the period 2000-2014. HIV/AIDS articles and citations were measured as research productivity. A set of indices were examined to explore China's scientific foot print in the global HIV/AIDS research. China has exhibited higher-than-average research performance since 2008. Two stages of HIV/AIDS research development have been identified as in 2000-2005 and 2005-2014. Major HIV/AIDS research institutions and scientists in China have been detected. Co-citation analysis of publications revealed important publications that acted as intellectual turning points of China’s HIV/AIDS research evolution during 2000-2014. Co-occurring keywords analysis revealed important and center terms of HIV/AIDS research publications from China. Combinations of related issues show that the HIV/AIDS research is currently focused on the “epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in China” and “molecular mechanisms of HIV/AIDS infection”.
The study demonstrates an integrated method of forecasting the trend of a
country’s publications. In this context the paper examines international collaboration in a
country’s overall publication and forecasts its future trend. The integrated method is based
on regression and scaling relationship. India is taken as a case study for this examination.
The study shows some interesting features of India’s publication pattern based on timeseries
data. One observes exponential nature of her publication growth from 2002 onwards.
International collaboration also exhibits exponential growth roughly from the same period.
Also one observes the faster growth of international collaborative papers than the overall
growth of research papers. The study predicts values of number of internationally collaborative
papers for the years 2015 and 2020. The robustness of the method is also
demonstrated.
Background: Analysis of PubMed publications as an indicator of the research productivity
of individual countries, regions, or institutions has recently become a field of interest.
Aim: The aim was to assess the past trends in PubMed‑indexed medical publications from
Mansoura Faculty of Medicine and to have an idea about the current situation in medical
research. Materials and Methods: PubMed was searched for publications affiliated to
Mansoura from the end of the calendar year 2012 and earlier. Results: Of 2798 papers related
to Mansoura, 1756 publications were included in the analysis, and 1042 publications were
excluded (false positives). The highest number of publications was in 2011 (10.6%, 187/1756)
followed by 2012 (10.2%, 179/1756). There was an increase of the publication rate
over 5‑years period until it reaches 47.0% (826/1756) during the period from 2008 to 2012.
The main high‑producing department was Urology and Nephrology, which accounted for
35.9% (631/1756) of the total publications followed by Pediatrics and Parasitology. The
median number of authors participated in the researches was four ranging from 1 to 23.
Most of the publications were in the form of intervention/clinical trials (38.4%, 662/1756)
followed by descriptive/cross‑sectional study (38.3%, 659/1756). The median of the impact
factor was 1.99 ranging from 0.27 to 53.3. Conclusion: The publication productivity of
Mansoura Faculty of Medicine showed fluctuating pattern from the end of the calendar year
2012 and earlier. Future prospects for increasing research productivity should be considered to
increase the number and quality of publications and academic staff participating in high‑quality
international researches.
Many diseases in Africa can be prevented with appropriate public health interventions. This study aimed to assess the bibliometric characteristics of public health related research articles published by researchers in African institutions from 1991 to 2005. Data used in this study were obtained from the online version of the ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded). Articles published between 1991 and 2005 that had the phrase 'public health' in the title, author keywords or abstract, and had at least one author whose contact address was in an African country, were selected for analysis. The annual number of public health related articles published by African researchers significantly increased from 28 articles in 1991 to 135 articles in 2005, a 382% increase. International collaboration also increased: from 45% of articles having international collaborators during 1991-1995, to 52% during1996-2000, and to 67% during 2001-2005. Collaborations were mostly with European and North American countries. Keywords, subject categories and collaboration patterns of articles varied across regions, reflecting differences in needs and collaboration networks. Public health related research output, as well as international collaborations, have been increasing in Africa. Regional variation observed in this study may assist policymakers to facilitate the advancement of public health research in different regions of Africa, and could be useful for international organisations in identifying needs and to allocate research funding. Future bibliometric analyses of articles published by African researchers, can consider conducting regional comparisons using standardised methods, as well as describing the overall patterns, in order to provide a more comprehensive view of their bibliometric characteristics.
Background:
Institut Pasteur International Network (IPIN), which includes 32 research institutes around the world, is a network of research and expertise to fight against infectious diseases. A scientometric approach was applied to describe research and collaboration activities of IPIN.
Methods:
Publications were identified using a manual search of IPIN member addresses in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) between 2006 and 2011. Total publications were then subcategorized by geographic regions. Several scientometric indicators and the H-index were employed to estimate the scientific production of each IPIN member. Subject and geographical overlay maps were also applied to visualize the network activities of the IPIN members.
Results:
A total number of 12667 publications originated from IPIN members. Each author produced an average number of 2.18 papers and each publication received an average of 13.40 citations. European Pasteur Institutes had the largest amount of publications, authored papers, and H-index values. Biochemistry and molecular biology, microbiology, immunology and infectious diseases were the most important research topics, respectively. Geographic mapping of IPIN publications showed wide international collaboration among IPIN members around the world.
Conclusion:
IPIN has strong ties with national and international authorities and organizations to investigate the current and future health issues. It is recommended to use scientometric and collaboration indicators as measures of research performance in IPIN future policies and investment decisions.
This paper studies disciplinary differences in citation impacts of different types of co-publishing. The citation impacts of international, domestic inter-organizational and domestic intra-organizational co-publications, and single-authored publications, are compared. In particular, we examine the extent to which the number of authors explains the potential differences in citation impacts when compared to the influence of different types of international and domestic collaborations. The analysis is based on Finland’s publications in Thomson Reuters Web of Science database in 1990–2008. Finland is a small country, thus, it has fewer opportunities to find collaborators inside own country when compared to larger countries. Finland’s science policy has underlined internationalization and research collaboration as key means to increase the quality and impact of Finnish research. This study indicates that both international and domestic co-publishing have steadily increased during the past two decades in all disciplinary groups. International co-publications gain on average more citations than domestic co-publications. In natural sciences and engineering, co-authorship explains only a small proportion of variability in publications’ citation rates. When the effect of the number of authors is taken into account there are no big differences in citation impacts between international and domestic co-publications. However, international co-publications by ten authors or more gather significantly more citations than other publications. In humanities, the difference in citation impacts between co-authored publications in relation to single-authored publications is significant. However, international co-publications are not on average more highly cited in relation to domestic co-publications in humanities.
Using the InCites tool of Thomson Reuters, this study compares normalized citation impact values calculated for China, Japan, France, Germany, United States, and the UK throughout the time period from 1981 to 2010. InCites offers a unique opportunity to study the normalized citation impacts of countries using (i) a long publication window (1981 to 2010), (ii) a differentiation in (broad or more narrow) subject areas, and (iii) allowing for the use of statistical procedures in order to obtain an insightful investigation of national citation trends across the years. Using four broad categories, our results show significantly increasing trends in citation impact values for France, the UK, and especially Germany across the last thirty years in all areas. The citation impact of papers from China is still at a relatively low level (mostly below the world average), but the country follows an increasing trend line. The USA exhibits a stable pattern of high citation impact values across the years. With small impact differences between the publication years, the US trend is increasing in engineering and technology but decreasing in medical and health sciences as well as in agricultural sciences. Similar to the USA, Japan follows increasing as well as decreasing trends in different subject areas, but the variability across the years is small. In most of the years, papers from Japan perform below or approximately at the world average in each subject area.
Recent discussion about the increase in international research collaboration
suggests a comprehensive global network centred around a group of core
countries and driven by generic socio-economic factors where the global system
influences all national and institutional outcomes. In counterpoint, we
demonstrate that the collaboration pattern for countries in Africa is far from
universal. Instead, it exhibits layers of internal clusters and external links
that are explained not by monotypic global influences but by regional geography
and, perhaps even more strongly, by history, culture and language. Analysis of
these bottom-up, subjective, human factors is required in order to provide the
fuller explanation useful for policy and management purposes.
The network of international co-authorship relations has been dominated by
certain European nations and the USA, but this network is rapidly expanding at
the global level. Between 40 and 50 countries appear in the center of the
international network in 2011, and almost all (201) nations are nowadays
involved in international collaboration. In this brief communication, we
present both a global map with the functionality of a Google Map (zooming,
etc.) and network maps based on normalized relations. These maps reveal
complementary aspects of the network. International collaboration in the
generation of knowledge claims (that is, the context of discovery) changes the
structural layering of the sciences. Previously, validation was at the global
level and discovery more dependent on local contexts. This changing
relationship between the geographical and intellectual dimensions of the
sciences also has implications for national science policies.
It has been argued that whilst globalisation brings with it significant challenges, it also provides an opportunity for unifying health care activity and that of related research practices across international boundaries. Internationalisation, often confused with globalisation, is a process that can lead to a more extensive pattern of activity and collaboration. International research collaboration in health care has intensified and is frequently regarded as an indicator of quality and a way in which to develop and disseminate scientific knowledge to newly developing countries. There is however little substantive information for researchers new to the global research network on how best to manage the challenges posed by international collaboration, nor ways in which to measure the effectiveness of the same. In this paper we begin by examining the importance of international research collaboration before outlining some of the challenges of global information management. Drawing upon our own experience of jointly funded research initiatives and transnational working, alongside the available literature, we signpost some of the possible processes, practicalities and problems encountered when attempting to establish common ground.
Background
PubMed is a free web literature search service that contains almost 21 millions of abstracts and publications with almost 5 million user queries daily. The purposes of the study were to compare trends in PubMed-indexed cancer and biomedical publications from Egypt to that of the world and to predict future publication volumes.
Methods
The PubMed was searched for the biomedical publications between 1991 and 2010 (publications dates). Affiliation was then limited to Egypt. Further limitation was applied to cancer, human and animal publications. Poisson regression model was used for prediction of future number of publications between 2011 and 2020.
Results
Cancer publications contributed 23% to biomedical publications both for Egypt and the world. Egyptian biomedical and cancer publications contributed about 0.13% to their world counterparts. This contribution was more than doubled over the study period. Egyptian and world’s publications increased from year to year with rapid rise starting the year 2003. Egyptian as well as world’s human cancer publications showed the highest increases. Egyptian publications had some peculiarities; they showed some drop at the years 1994 and 2002 and apart from the decline in the animal: human ratio with time, all Egyptian publications in the period 1991-2000 were significantly more than those in 2001-2010 (P < 0.05 for all). By 2020, Egyptian biomedical and cancer publications will increase by 158.7% and 280% relative to 2010 to constitute 0.34% and 0.17% of total PubMed publications, respectively.
Conclusions
The Egyptian contribution to world’s biomedical and cancer publications needs significant improvements through research strategic planning, setting national research priorities, adequate funding and researchers’ training.
Using the Science Citation Index (CD-Rom version) for 1990 and 2000, this paper analyses international co-authorships. The paper presents the methodology for identifying these co-authorships. Analysis is presented on observed linkages at the global level and on regional bases. The architecture of the network is further explored using statistical methods and factor analysis to reveal intense relationships as well as the core members of a global network. Findings show that, in the 10 years between 1990 and 2000, the global network has expanded to include more nations and it has become more interconnected. Regional networks show emerging hubs. Within the global network, a core set of countries has expanded from six in 1990 to eight in 2000. Factor analysis suggests that large countries compete with each other for partners in the global network. We discuss implications for public policy of the rise of a global network of scientists operating somewhat independently of national interests.
ext">
The main objective of this study is the elaboration of national characteristics in internationalscientific co-authorship relations. An attempt is made to find statistical evidence of symmetry andasymmetry in co-publication links, of the relation between international co-authorship and bothnational research profiles and citation impact. Four basic types can be distinguished in the relativespecialisation of domestic and internationally co-authored publications of 50 most activecountries in 1995/96 concerning the significance of the difference between the two profiles.Co-publication maps reveal structural changes in international co-authorship links in the lastdecade. Besides stable links and coherent clusters, new nodes and links have also been found. Notall links between individual countries are symmetric. Specific (unidirectional) co-authorshipaffinity could also be detected in several countries.As expected, international co-authorship, on an average, results in publications with highercitation rates than purely domestic papers. However, the influence of international collaborationon the national citation impact varies considerably between the countries (and within oneindividual country between fields). In some cases there is, however, no citation advantage for oneor even for both partners.
ere is, however, no citation advantage for oneor even for both partners.
Co-authorship is one of the most tangible and well documented forms of scientific collaboration. Almost every aspect of scientific
collaboration networks can be reliably tracked by analysing co-authorship networks by bibliometric methods. In the present
study, scientific collaboration is considered both at individual and national levels, with special focus given to multinational
collaborations. Both literature data and original results witnessed a dramatic quantitative and structural change in the last
decades of the 20th century. The changes, to great extent, can be attributed to the universal tendencies of globalisation
and the political restructuring of Europe. The standards and, particularly, the visibility of scientific research, as a rule,
benefit from the ever increasing level of collaboration, but the profits do not come automatically. This fact underlines the
necessity of a regular quantitative monitoring of inputs and outcomes, i.e., bibliometric surveys.
Policy makers, at various levels of governance, generally encourage the development of research collaboration. However the underlying determinants of collaboration are not completely clear. In particular, the literature lacks studies that, taking the individual researcher as the unit of analysis, attempt to understand if and to what extent the researcher’s scientific performance might impact on his/her degree of collaboration with foreign colleagues. The current work examines the international collaborations of Italian university researchers for the period 2001–2005, and puts them in relation to each individual’s research performance. The results of the investigation, which assumes co-authorship as proxy of research collaboration, show that both research productivity and average quality of output have positive effects on the degree of international collaboration achieved by a scientist.
Objectives
Healthcare research performance is increasingly assessed through research indicators. We performed a systematic review to identify the indicators that have been used to measure healthcare research performance. We evaluated their feasibility, validity, reliability and acceptability; and finally assessed the utility of these indicators in terms of measuring performance in individuals, specialties, institutions and countries.
Design
A systematic review was performed by searching EMBASE, PsycINFO, Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases between 1950 and September 2010.
Setting
Studies of healthcare research were appraised. Healthcare was defined as the prevention, treatment and management of illness and the preservation of mental and physical wellbeing through the services offered by the medical and allied health professions.
Participants
All original studies that evaluated research performance indicators in healthcare were included.
Main outcome measures
Healthcare research indicators, data sources, study characteristics, results and limitations for each study were studied.
Results
The most common research performance indicators identified in 50 studies were: number of publications ( n = 38), number of citations ( n = 27), Impact Factor ( n = 15), research funding ( n = 10), degree of co-authorship ( n = 9), and h index ( n = 5). There was limited investigation of feasibility, validity, reliability and acceptability, although the utility of these indicators was adequately described.
Conclusion
Currently, there is only limited evidence to assess the value of healthcare research performance indicators. Further studies are required to define the application of these indicators through a balanced approach for quality and innovation. The ultimate aim of utilizing healthcare research indicators is to create a culture of measuring research performance to support the translation of research into greater societal and economic impact.
Arboviruses are arthropod-borne viruses, which include West Nile fever virus (WNFV), a mosquito-borne virus, Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV), a mosquito-borne virus, and Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV), a tick-borne virus. These arthropod-borne viruses can cause disease in different domestic and wild animals and in humans, posing a threat to public health because of their epidemic and zoonotic potential. In recent decades, the geographical distribution of these diseases has expanded. Outbreaks of WNF have already occurred in Europe, especially in the Mediterranean basin. Moreover, CCHF is endemic in many European countries and serious outbreaks have occurred, particularly in the Balkans, Turkey and Southern Federal Districts of Russia. In 2000, RVF was reported for the first time outside the African continent, with cases being confirmed in Saudi Arabia and Yemen. This spread was probably caused by ruminant trade and highlights that there is a threat of expansion of the virus into other parts of Asia and Europe. In the light of global warming and globalisation of trade and travel, public interest in emerging zoonotic diseases has increased. This is especially evident regarding the geographical spread of vector-borne diseases. A multi-disciplinary approach is now imperative, and groups need to collaborate in an integrated manner that includes vector control, vaccination programmes, improved therapy strategies, diagnostic tools and surveillance, public awareness, capacity building and improvement of infrastructure in endemic regions.
The global nature of antimicrobial resistance and the failure to control the emergence of resistant organisms demand the implementation of a global surveillance program involving both developed and developing countries. Because of the urgent need for infection control interventions and for rapid distribution of information about emerging organisms, we initiated the International Network for the Study and Prevention of Emerging Antimicrobial Resistance (INSPEAR). Its main objectives are to serve as an early warning system for emerging antimicrobial-drug resistant pathogens, to facilitate rapid distribution of information about emerging multidrug-resistant pathogens to hospitals and public health authorities worldwide, and to serve as a model for the development and implementation of infection control interventions.
In this study, bibliometric methods were used to investigate prevention and control of infectious diseases (IDs). The aim was to gain an overall view of published research on IDs in Europe as part of the collaborative study SPHERE (Strengthening Public Health Research in Europe).
A framework for research on IDs and public health was developed with definitions, keywords, inclusion and exclusion criteria. A detailed web search strategy based on the framework was designed, piloted and refined. The PubMed electronic database was searched for 'infectious diseases' as a whole, and for several subtopic areas, across July 1995 and June 2005. Numbers of publications by year, country, population and Gross Domestic Product were calculated.
Nearly 21,000 publications on the main topic and sub-topics were found, with a progressive increase particularly since 2000. There was a marked heterogeneity between countries. France, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, UK and Belgium were the most prolific, and Eastern European countries less so. 'Vaccine-preventable diseases', 'Sexually transmitted diseases', 'Drug-resistant infections', 'Insect-arthropod-related diseases' and 'Childhood diseases' were the main fields of scientific production. Research on 'Epidemiology and Surveillance' appeared, in general, to be better represented than research on 'Prevention and Control'. Discussion: This is the first time such a broad approach has been used to describe public health research on IDs across Europe. A priority should be cooperation between European states where there is little or no, scientific production. Bibliometrics has limitations, but is of value to indicate a general pattern.
International research collaborations in cardiology and cardiovasology field have been widely supported by governments and organizations to prevent and control cardiovascular diseases. However, few attempts have been made to explore the international research collaborations in the cardiology and cardiovasology (C&C) field. Based on 126,791 articles in four C&C related journals with Impact Factor greater than 10 and spanning 2001 to 2010, this study explores the relationship between the research performance and international research collaborations within the C&C domain. The results demonstrated that both cross-national publications and cross-institutional publications were higher quality than those from scientists within the same institution, and that there is a significant positive correlation between scientists' research performance and international collaboration. In conclusion, international collaborations should be encouraged within the C&C research domain.
Scientific co-authorship of African researchers has become a fashionable topic in the recent scientometric literature. Researchers are investigating the effects, modes, dynamics and motives of collaboration in a continental research system which is in an embryonic stage and in different stages of development from country to country. In this article we attempt to provide some additional evidence by examining both patterns of collaboration at country and continental levels and the scientific disciplines emphasised. Our findings indicate that the continent's research emphasises medical and natural resources disciplines to the detriment of disciplines supporting knowledge based economies and societies. Furthermore, we identify that the collaborative patterns in Africa are substantial higher than in the rest of the world. A number of questions related to research collaboration and its effects are raised.
There is a need for data about Arab research systems. Some recent international reports have called into question their lack of interest in developing scientific creations. Yet rapid changes are taking place. This article shows the trends and local shades of the scientific output (in terms of internationally recognised publications) in West Asia and North Africa.
This paper analyses existing trends in the collaborative structure of the Pharmacology and Pharmacy field in Spain and explores its relationship with research impact. The evolution in terms of size of the research community, the typology of collaborative links (national, international) and the scope of the collaboration (size of links, type of partners) are studied by means of different measures based on co-authorship. Growing heterogeneity of collaboration and impact of research are observed over the years. Average journal impact (MNJS) and citation score (MNCS) normalised to world average tend to grow with the number of authors, the number of institutions and collaboration type. Both national and international collaboration show MNJS values above the country’s average, but only internationally co-authored publications attain citation rates above the world’s average. This holds at country and institutional sector levels, although not all institutional sectors obtain the same benefit from collaboration. Multilateral collaboration with high-level R&D countries yields the highest values of research impact, although the impact of collaboration with low-level R&D countries has been optimised over the years. Although scientific collaboration is frequently based on individual initiative, policy actions are required to promote the more heterogeneous types of collaboration.
Collaboration in science has been the subject of many studies. In this study we focus on the influence of the research profile
of an institute on its collaborative behaviour and pattern. The classification model developed by the authors provides a helpful
tool to identify the specialisms of a research institution and to create groups of similar institutions that enable study
of the relationship between science fields and collaborative behaviour. First we show the effect of research profile on the
shares of different types of collaboration. Next, citation indicators are used to investigate the changes on impact and publication
strategy over the different types of collaboration. Finally we try to find for each group the research profile of the most
preferred partners.
Jonathan Adams analyses papers from the past three decades and finds
that the best science comes from international collaboration.
We analyze the benefits in terms of scientific impact
deriving from international collaboration, examining
both those for a country when it collaborates and also
those for the other countries when they are collaborating
with the former. The data show the more countries
there are involved in the collaboration, the greater the
gain in impact. Contrary to what we expected, the scientific
impact of a country does not significantly influence
the benefit it derives from collaboration, but does seem
to positively influence the benefit obtained by the other
countries collaborating with it. Although there was a
weak correlation between these two classes of benefit,
the countries with the highest impact were clear outliers
from this correlation, tending to provide proportionally
more benefit to their collaborating countries than they
themselves obtained. Two surprising findings were the
null benefit resulting from collaboration with Iran, and
the small benefit resulting from collaboration with the
United States despite its high impact.
International collaboration is being heralded as the hallmark of contemporary scientific production. Yet little quantitative evidence has portrayed the landscape and trends of such collaboration. To this end, 14,000,000 documents indexed in Thomson Reuters's Web of Science (WoS) were studied to provide a state-of-the-art description of scientific collaborations across the world. The results indicate that the number of authors in the largest research teams have not significantly grown during the past decade; however, the number of smaller research teams has seen significant increases in growth. In terms of composition, the largest teams have become more diverse than the latter teams and tend more toward interinstitutional and international collaboration. Investigating the size of teams showed large variation between fields. Mapping scientific cooperation at the country level reveals that Western countries situated at the core of the map are extensively cooperating with each other. High-impact institutions are significantly more collaborative than others. This work should inform policy makers, administrators, and those interested in the progression of scientific collaboration.
The scientific performance of National Taiwan University (NTU) and Peking University (PKU) were compared by two indicators, namely citations per publication and h-index, based on the data extracted from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded), Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) Web of Science from 2000 to 2009. Analyzed aspects covered publication outputs, publication patterns, and international and inter-institutional collaborations of the two universities. The two universities were in the same scale based on the number of publications. Articles from electrical and electronic engineering dominated the other articles in NTU while PKU researchers published a great number of articles in the basic science fields. Material science was the new field for these two universities. The USA had the greatest number of collaborated articles accounting for 15% and 12% of total articles with NTU and PKU respectively. Article impact followed a decreasing order of international collaboration, inter-institutional collaboration, and independent articles for both universities. PKU articles had higher visibility. In addition, the Essential Science Indicators were applied to investigate the research activities of NTU and PKU.
This paper explores recent trends in the size of scientific teams and in institutional collaborations. The data derive from 2.4 million scientific papers written in 110 top U.S. research universities over the period 1981–1999. The top 110 account for a large share of published basic research conducted in the U.S. during this time.We measure team size by the number of authors on a scientific paper. Using this measure we find that team size increases by 50% over the 19-year period. We supplement team size with measures of domestic and foreign institutional collaborations, which capture the geographic dispersion of team workers. The time series evidence suggests that the trend towards more geographically dispersed scientific teams accelerates beginning with papers published at the start of the 1990s. This acceleration suggests a sharp decline in the cost of collaboration. Our hypothesis is that the decline is due to the deployment of the National Science Foundation's NSFNET and its connection to networks in Europe and Japan after 1987.Using a panel of top university departments we also find that private universities and departments whose scientists have earned prestigious awards participate in larger teams, as do departments that have larger amounts of federal funding. Placement of former graduate students is a key determinant of institutional collaborations, especially collaborations with firms and with foreign scientific institutions. Finally, the evidence suggests that scientific output and influence increase with team size and that influence rises along with institutional collaborations. Since increasing team size implies an increase in the division of labor, these results suggest that scientific productivity increases with the scientific division of labor.
This article deals with the role of internationally co-authored papers (co-publications). Specifically, we compare, within
a data-set of German research units, citation and co-publication indicators as a proxy for the unobserved quality dimension
of scientific research. In that course we will also deal with the question whether both citations and co-publications are
considerably related. Our results suggest that, although there is a strong partial correlation between citations and co-publications
within a multivariate setting, we cannot use reasonably normalised co-publication indicators as an alternative proxy for quality.
Thus, concerning quality assessment, there remains a primer on citation analysis.
This study analyzes the level of co-authorship of Spanish research in Library and Information Science (LIS) until 2009, the chronological development that has taken place, and the level of local, domestic and international cooperation. This bibliometric study was made using the data retrieved from the Web of Knowledge (WoK) following a dual strategy—on the one hand through the filter of the category Information Science & Library Science, and on the other hand through a subject search. In this way a significant number of works has been retrieved, some of which are in journals indexed in SCI or A&HCI and not in the SSCI. The results show a significant increase in all co-authorship, including publications in English and those involving international collaboration. As with the increase in Spanish participation in social science (WoK), this growth, coupled with the significant increase in Spanish scientific production in the area of LIS, suggests that the discipline in Spain has entered a more mature phase—although so far it has focused particularly on bibliometric studies.
This study aims to investigate the influence of different patterns of collaboration on the citation impact of Harvard University’s
publications. Those documents published by researchers affiliated with Harvard University in WoS from 2000–2009, constituted
the population of the research which was counted for 124,937 records. Based on the results, only 12% of Harvard publications
were single author publications. Different patterns of collaboration were investigated in different subject fields. In all
22 examined fields, the number of co-authored publications is much higher than single author publications. In fact, more than
60% of all publications in each field are multi-author publications. Also, the normalized citation per paper for co-authored
publications is higher than that of single author publications in all fields. In addition, the largest number of publications
in all 22 fields were also published through inter-institutional collaboration and were as a result of collaboration among
domestic researchers and not international ones. In general, the results of the study showed that there was a significant
positive correlation between the number of authors and the number of citations in Harvard publications. In addition, publications
with more number of institutions have received more number of citations, whereas publications with more number of foreign
collaborators were not much highly cited.
There are many barriers to scientific research in Egypt, including lack of funding, lack of a scientific atmosphere, and "brain drain" of scientists who produce high quality research.
In a recent study, de Lange and Glanzel introduced a model for the bibliometric analysis of the extent of multinational co-authorship links. They showed that this model can be considered a generalisation of the 'fractionation approach' by Nederhof and Moed. The authors analysed international collaboration links (the Multilateral Collaboration Index) as a function of the share of internationally co-authored papers. The measurement of the deviation of individual countries from (sub-)field peculiarities proved, however, complicated. The intensifying international collaboration and, in several fields, the substantial growth of number of multinational papers (involving three or more countries) in the 90s necessitates a detailed analysis of co-publication distributions, that is, of the distributions of partner countries in a given country's publication output. The main objective of the study is to elaborate such a measure to be used in addition to the share of international publications and the Multilateral Collaboration Index. In addition, a detailed analysis of national citation impact of domestic, bilateral and multilateral papers in the major science fields is conducted.
Several research studies and reports on national and European science and technology indicators have recently presented figures reflecting intensifying scientific collaboration and increasing citation impact in practically all science areas and at all levels of aggregation. The main objective of this paper is twofold, namely first to analyse if the number or weight of actors in scientific communication has increased, if patterns of documented scientific communication and collaboration have changed in the last two decades and if these tendencies have inflationary features. The second question is concerned with the role of scientific collaboration in this context. In particular, the question will be answered to what extent co-authorship and publication activity, on one hand, and co-authorship and citation impact, on the other hand, do interact.
Unlabelled:
This study aims to analyze ten-year (1996-2005) biomedical publications produced in Egypt in PubMed. A Medline search was performed on 12th December 2006 with the aid of PubMed to have the total number of publications of authors affiliated to Egyptian institutions for the last decade. The search was then saved in Medline format text files, which were converted into Excel file and then captured as a new database query via SPSS software including 6423 records of SPSS data file format. Results showed that the share of Egyptian publications from the total number of publications in PubMed has increased from 0.09% in 1996 to 0.14% in 2005. Review articles and clinical trial articles constituted only 3.41% and 6.9% respectively of the total publications. The average number of authors for the overall publications was 3.41, increasing over the last few years of the decade, and varied significantly according to the type of publication and the journal. The J Egypt Soc Parasitol followed by J Pharm Biomed Anal and East Mediterr Health J came on top of the list of 1139 journals that published the Egyptian studies (11.44%, 3.07% and 2.51% respectively).
Conclusion:
Despite the increase in Egyptian publications, the ratio of review publications to its equivalent from the overall PubMed publications was not satisfactory. An increase in number of authors per publications was observed.
Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship Handbook of quantitative science and technology research
- W Glänzel
- A Schubert
Glänzel, W. and Schubert, A. 2004. Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In:
H. F. Moed, et al. eds. Handbook of quantitative science and technology research.
Dordrecht: Kluwer: 257–276.
Authorship, collaboration and citation patterns of biomedical journals published in Spain and included in journal citation reports
- G Gonzalez-Alcaide
Gonzalez-Alcaide, G. 2010. Authorship, collaboration and citation patterns of biomedical
journals published in Spain and included in journal citation reports (2003-2007).
Country and lending groups Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-classifications
- World Bank
World
Bank.
2015.
Country
and
lending
groups.
Available
at:
http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-classifications.