Average Citation Impact Research Articles

Dependencies and autonomy in research performance: examining nanoscience and nanotechnology in emerging countries

International collaboration in the creation of knowledge is changing the structural stratification of science, with implications for science policy. Analyses of collaboration in developing and emergent countries are of particular significance because initiatives are often the result of “research-for-aid” arrangements, generally based on North–South asymmetries. However, collaboration for mutual benefit and excellence has gained increasing acceptance, with “partner” selection becoming a strategic priority to enhance one’s own production. This article explores the capacity of BRIC and select Latin American countries in the generation of scientific knowledge and their visibility at the global level in the field of nanoscience and nanotechnology. The goal is to determine to what extent countries benefit from the role of their collaborators to heighten research performance in terms of citation; and how collaboration could help countries to leverage their competitiveness through the design of research and development agendas. The method relies on the decomposition of leadership, as well as its consideration in view of performance indicators such as normalized citation impact, scientific excellence, and technological impact. The results suggest that the growth of international collaboration should be interpreted as a positive aspect. Furthermore, a progressive internationalization of scientific activity concerned with local needs or topics of interest is found to have the capacity to determine research agendas whose interest would extend to communities far beyond, thereby contributing to the development of science at a national level.

Construction of an evaluation index system for determining the academic impact of military medical scholars

IntroductionAcademic papers are an essential manner for describing new ideas and consolidating existing concepts in the field of military medicine. The academic impact of military medical publications reflects the extent...

Astronomy in Chile: Assessment of scientific productivity through a bibliometric analysis

The skies of Northern Chile are considered among the best in the world for astronomy due to their geographical, climatic and atmospheric conditions. In fact, during the last several decades, a great number of astronomical observatories have been built by space research institutions devoted to space research, turning Chile into one of the countries with the greatest astronomical observation capacity in the world. Consequently, it is relevant to explore and assess the development of astronomy in Chile during the last ten years (2005-2015), carrying out a bibliometric analysis to extract traditional metrics, complemented with alternative metrics, to identify the Chilean production and scientific contribution of research in this field of knowledge. The results from traditional metrics, based on the information obtained in the Web of Science (WoS) database analyzed through InCites for the Astronomy & Astrophysics category indicate a sustained increase of the scientific production for the discipline during the last ten years. In particular, the Normalized Citation Impact of organizations and institutions conducting research in Chile is above the worldwide average. On the other hand, the alternative metrics, including for instance, the altmetrics types presented by the SCOPUS database, reflect that the Chilean research impact is much lower in the context of social networks.

Gender and citation impact in management research

Abstract This study investigates the extent to which a gender gap exists in the citation rates of management researchers. Based on a cross-sectional sample of 26,783 publications and 65,436 authorships, we illuminate possible differences in women’s and men’s average citation impact per paper, adjusting for covariation attributable to geographical setting, institutional reputation, self-citations, collaborative patterns and journal prestige. We find a marginal difference in citation impact in favor of women management scholars. Women are also slightly more likely than men to author articles among the top-10% most cited in their field. Yet given the sensitivity of our results to uncertainties in the data, these variations should not be overgeneralized. In the large picture, differences in citation rates appear to be a negligible factor in the reproduction of gender inequalities in management research.

Confidence intervals for normalised citation counts: Can they delimit underlying research capability?

Normalised citation counts are routinely used to assess the average impact of research groups or nations. There is controversy over whether confidence intervals for them are theoretically valid or practically useful. In response, this article introduces the concept of a group's underlying research capability to produce impactful research. It then investigates whether confidence intervals could delimit the underlying capability of a group in practice. From 123120 confidence interval comparisons for the average citation impact of the national outputs of ten countries within 36 individual large monodisciplinary journals, moderately fewer than 95% of subsequent indicator values fall within 95% confidence intervals from prior years, with the percentage declining over time. This is consistent with confidence intervals effectively delimiting the research capability of a group, although it does not prove that this is the cause of the results. The results are unaffected by whether internationally collaborative articles are included.

Metamaterials Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications Output during 2007-16

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The paper examines 9858 global publications output on metamaterials research, as covered in Scopus database during 2007-16. The study reveals that metamaterials research registered 15.27% growth and averaged citation impact to 10.08 citations per paper. The global share of top 10 most productive countries in metamaterials research is 84.97 % and their individual global share ranged from 3.30% to 25.57%. China accounted for the largest global share (25.71%), followed by USA (23.96%), U.K. (6.06%), India (5.26%), etc. Five of top 10 countries scored relative citation index above the world average i.e. more than 1: Germany (2.06), USA (1.81), U.K. (1.49), Canada (1.03) and Spain (1.01). The international collaborative publications share of top 10 most productive countries varied from 6.14% to 59.80%. Physics and astronomy, among subjects, contributed the largest publication share (59.36%), followed by engineering (56.71%), materials science (33.30%), computer science (20.32%), mathematics (6.74%) and chemistry (4.46%). The top 20 most productive organisations and authors together contributed 24.69% and 13.17% global publications share respectively and 35.72% and 25.96% global citation share respectively. The top 20 journals accounted for 45.97% share of global output (5743 papers) reported in journals. Of the total global output on metamaterials research, 52 papers were found as highly cited papers averaging 535.64 citations per paper in 10 years. These 52 highly cited papers involved the participation of 310 authors and 142 organisations and were </span><span>published in 20 journals. </span></p></div></div></div>

Metamaterials Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications Output during 2007-16

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The paper examines 9858 global publications output on metamaterials research, as covered in Scopus database during 2007-16. The study reveals that metamaterials research registered 15.27% growth and averaged citation impact to 10.08 citations per paper. The global share of top 10 most productive countries in metamaterials research is 84.97 % and their individual global share ranged from 3.30% to 25.57%. China accounted for the largest global share (25.71%), followed by USA (23.96%), U.K. (6.06%), India (5.26%), etc. Five of top 10 countries scored relative citation index above the world average i.e. more than 1: Germany (2.06), USA (1.81), U.K. (1.49), Canada (1.03) and Spain (1.01). The international collaborative publications share of top 10 most productive countries varied from 6.14% to 59.80%. Physics and astronomy, among subjects, contributed the largest publication share (59.36%), followed by engineering (56.71%), materials science (33.30%), computer science (20.32%), mathematics (6.74%) and chemistry (4.46%). The top 20 most productive organisations and authors together contributed 24.69% and 13.17% global publications share respectively and 35.72% and 25.96% global citation share respectively. The top 20 journals accounted for 45.97% share of global output (5743 papers) reported in journals. Of the total global output on metamaterials research, 52 papers were found as highly cited papers averaging 535.64 citations per paper in 10 years. These 52 highly cited papers involved the participation of 310 authors and 142 organisations and were </span><span>published in 20 journals. </span></p></div></div></div>

Scientometric Analysis of the Research Output of Physics and Astronomy of Guru Nanak Dev University during 2006-15

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The study attempts to analyse research contributions of the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar in physics and astronomy during the period 2006-15. The data for this study was extracted from Scopus. The study analyses the </span><span>year-wise research productivity, national and international collaborations, top collaborating institutions, most prolific </span><span>authors, journals used for communication, most preferred journals for publication, number of citations received by the University during the period under study. This paper analyses that the university has published 652 papers in physics and astronomy. The University had registered the average citation impact per paper of 7.01 per cent and 6 publications received 51 to 100 citations. Among the Indian universities, University stood at 23</span><span>rd </span><span>rank in term of publications output (652) and h-index (29), 16</span><span>th </span><span>rank in average citation per paper (7.01 per cent) and 18</span><span>th </span><span>rank in share of high cited papers (1 per cent) and 19</span><span>th </span><span>rank in terms of international collaborative papers (27.45 per cent) during 2006-15. Around 68.71 per cent publications of the University in physics and astronomy were in national collaboration between GNDU and several other Indian organisations. The study clearly indicates that journals are the most preferred form of publication to communicate research works by the researchers. </span></p></div></div></div>

Scientometric Analysis of the Research Output of Physics and Astronomy of Guru Nanak Dev University during 2006-15

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The study attempts to analyse research contributions of the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar in physics and astronomy during the period 2006-15. The data for this study was extracted from Scopus. The study analyses the </span><span>year-wise research productivity, national and international collaborations, top collaborating institutions, most prolific </span><span>authors, journals used for communication, most preferred journals for publication, number of citations received by the University during the period under study. This paper analyses that the university has published 652 papers in physics and astronomy. The University had registered the average citation impact per paper of 7.01 per cent and 6 publications received 51 to 100 citations. Among the Indian universities, University stood at 23</span><span>rd </span><span>rank in term of publications output (652) and h-index (29), 16</span><span>th </span><span>rank in average citation per paper (7.01 per cent) and 18</span><span>th </span><span>rank in share of high cited papers (1 per cent) and 19</span><span>th </span><span>rank in terms of international collaborative papers (27.45 per cent) during 2006-15. Around 68.71 per cent publications of the University in physics and astronomy were in national collaboration between GNDU and several other Indian organisations. The study clearly indicates that journals are the most preferred form of publication to communicate research works by the researchers. </span></p></div></div></div>

Bibliometric patterns and indicators of research collaboration of Egyptian health scientists: 1980

The present study examines Egyptian publications and research collaboration in health sciences using Thomson Reuters InCitesTM 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 accuracy of confidence intervals for field normalised indicators

When comparing the average citation impact of research groups, universities and countries, field normalisation reduces the influence of discipline and time. Confidence intervals for these indicators can help with attempts to infer whether differences between sets of publications are due to chance factors. Although both bootstrapping and formulae have been proposed for these, their accuracy is unknown. In response, this article uses simulated data to systematically compare the accuracy of confidence limits in the simplest possible case, a single field and year. The results suggest that the MNLCS (Mean Normalised Log-transformed Citation Score) confidence interval formula is conservative for large groups but almost always safe, whereas bootstrap MNLCS confidence intervals tend to be accurate but can be unsafe for smaller world or group sample sizes. In contrast, bootstrap MNCS (Mean Normalised Citation Score) confidence intervals can be very unsafe, although their accuracy increases with sample sizes.

Global mobile technology publications: A scientometric assessment during 2007–16

The paper examines mobile technology research covering 29792 global publications as indexed in Scopus database during 2007-16. The mobile technology registered 5.05% annual growth and averaged citation impact of 4.31 CPP. The top 10 most productive countries accounted for 73.54% global publications share, and country-wise they contributed 3.14% to 18.08%, global publication share. The USA is world leader in mobile technology research with 18.08% share, closely followed by China (17.19%). The remaining top countries contributed global publications share from 3.14% to 6.69%. The international collaborative publications share of top 10 most productive countries varied from 10.58% (India) to 40.70% (U.K.) in mobile technology research. Computer Science, among subjects, contributed the largest publication share (64.97%), followed by Engineering (37.41%), Social Sciences (10.75%) etc. The top 20 most productive organizations and authors contributed 9.15% and 1.15% global publication share respectively and 10.42% and 2.54% global citation share respectively during 2007-16. The top 20 journals contributed 5.66% share of global journal output.

Allergic rhinitis research in India: A scientometric study of research output during 2007–16

The paper examines 360 Indian publications on allergic rhinitis research, as covered in Scopus database during 2007-16, using various quantitative and qualitative parameters with a focus on its growth, citation quality, share of international collaborative papers, subject wise distribution, identification of significant keywords, contribution and impact of leading organizations and authors, contribution of most productive journals and characteristics of high cited papers. The global allergic rhinitis research is dominated by top 16 most productive countries which account for 87.78% share of the global output during 2007-16. The USA is the world leader with 20.62% (largest share) of global output and 35.8% share of global citation output on allergic rhinitis research, followed by Italy, Germany, UK, Japan, China and France during 2007-16. India is ranked at 16 th position with its global publication share of only 2.33%. India averaged citation impact of 7.76 citations per paper and international collaborative publication share of 14.44% during 2007-16. Medicine contributed the largest publication share (70.5% share). The top 10 most productive organizations and authors contributed 27.5% and 18.06% share to India’s publication output and 60.64% and 26.86% share to India’s citation output during 2007-16. The top 10 most productive journals contributed 23.33% share to its total Indian journal output during 2007-16.

Scoliosis: A scientometric assessment of global publications during 2007–16

The paper examined 11000 global publications in Scoliosis research, as indexed in Scopus database covering the 10 year period 2007-16. The Scoliosis research output registered a growth of 5.95% per annum and averaged citation impact of 9.09 citations per paper. Of the 80 countries which participated in global Scoliosis research, the top 15 contributed global publication share ranging individually between 2.34% and 32.25%. The USA accounted for the highest publication share (32.25%), followed by China (8.45%), Canada (6.84%) and others. Together, the top 15 most productive countries in Scoliosis research accounted for 92.51% of global publication share. Medicine among subjects accounted for the highest global publications share (94.08%) in Scoliosis research. The top 20 most productive organizations and authors together contributed 27.09% and 19.07% global publication share respectively and 51.23% and 34.26% global citation share respectively. Of the total publications output in Scoliosis research, 95.53% appeared in journal medium. The top 15 journals published 36.24% share of total output that appeared in journal medium. Of the total global output in Scoliosis research,

Digital libraries in India: A scientometric assessment of publications during 2007–16

The paper examines 424 Indian publications in the domain of digital library research in India, as covered in Scopus database during 2007-16. India registered 10.95% growth in digital library research, averaged citation impact to 2.53 citations per paper, accounted for 12.03% share of internationally collaborative papers (ICP), and ranked 7 th highest in its global publication share. Around 53.54% of the total papers in Indian digital library research registered 1 or more citations per paper in 10 years during 2007-16. Computer science accounted for the highest publications share (60.14%) in India’s digital library research, followed by social sciences (40.57%), engineering (14.86%), and a few others. during 2007-16. About 159 organizations and 226 authors contributed to India’s output in digital library research during 2007-16. The top 25 and 20 most productive Indian organizations and authors accounted for 35.85% and 16.27% national publication share respectively and 16.27% and 19.55% national citation share respectively during 2007-16. Of the total 424 publications, the top 15 journals accounted for 53.29% share of national output in journal medium during 2007-16. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology (with 23 papers) published most papers, followed by Annals of Library & Information Studies, Electronic Library and International Information and Library Review (8 papers each), Program (6 papers ), etc. during 2007-16.

Avoiding obscure topics and generalising findings produces higher impact research

Much academic research is never cited and may be rarely read, indicating wasted effort from the authors, referees and publishers. One reason that an article could be ignored is that its topic is, or appears to be, too obscure to be of wide interest, even if excellent scholarship produced it. This paper reports a word frequency analysis of 874,411 English article titles from 18 different Scopus natural, formal, life and health sciences categories 2009---2015 to assess the likelihood that research on obscure (rarely researched) topics is less cited. In all categories examined, unusual words in article titles associate with below average citation impact research. Thus, researchers considering obscure topics may wish to reconsider, generalise their study, or to choose a title that reflects the wider lessons that can be drawn. Authors should also consider including multiple concepts and purposes within their titles in order to attract a wider audience.

How to Combine Research Guarantor and Collaboration Patterns to Measure Scientific Performance of Countries in Scientific Fields: Nanoscience and Nanotechnology as a Case Study

This paper presents a comparative benchmarking of scientometric indicators to characterize the patterns of publication and research performance at the country level, in a specific field (nanoscience and nanotechnology) during the period 2003-2013. The aim is to assess how decisive collaboration may be in attaining a sound level of scientific performance, and how important leadership is for publication. To this end, we used a new methodological approach that contributes to the debate about scientific autonomy or dependency of countries in their scientific performance, and which may serve as an aid in decision-making with regard to research management. The results reveal that in terms of output, USA and China are the main producers; and due to the huge increase in their publications, Iran, India and Australia can be considered emerging countries. The results highlight USA, Ireland and Singapore as the countries with the highest levels of normalized citation impact, scientific excellence and good management of leadership, all of which suggest strong scientific development as well as scientific autonomy. Also worth mentioning is the high visibility and scientific consolidation of China and Australia, despite the meager growth of their output. Moreover, the performance results indicate that in most cases the countries whose pattern of publication is more international tend to have greater visibility. Yet a high degree of leadership does not always translate as a high performance level; the contrary is often true. Due to the limitations of the sample and characteristics of the field, we propose that future studies evaluate the generation of new knowledge in this field and refine the approach presented here, so as to better measure scientific performance.

RFID Technology and Libraries:A Bibliometric Assessment of Global Literature during 2002-14

The present study examines the world publications output (205) on "RFID Technology and Libraries" published during 2002-14, using a series of bibliometric indicators. The world output on 'RFID Technology and Libraries' registered 5.04% annual average growth and citation impact of 3.91 citations per paper in 13 years. The distribution of world publication output is skewed. The top 8 most productive countries (out of a total of 35) alone accounted for 67.32% world share. The top 8 countries which include - China, USA, Japan, Taiwan, India, South Korea, Malaysia and U.K. - accounted for 42.20% world citations share. However, the distribution of world output is widely scattered across 158 participating organizations. The top 14 organizations accounted for just 23.41% world publication share and 21.22% world citation share. The distribution of world output is also scattered widely across 139 authors. The top 15 authors accounted for just 23.41% world publication share and 17.73% world citation share. RFID applications into computer science was the largest (52.20% share), followed by social sciences (36.10%), engineering (33.66%), business, management and accounting (5.85) and biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (3.90%) during 2002-14. The top17 highly cited papers were individually cited from 10 to 286 times in 13 years since their publication year. The USA contributed 7 highly cited papers and Hong Kong, India, Switzerland and Taiwan contributed 2 each and Japan, South Korea and Jamaica 1 each.

The application of bibliometrics to research evaluation in the humanities and social sciences: An exploratory study using normalized Google Scholar data for the publications of a research institute

In the humanities and social sciences, bibliometric methods for the assessment of research performance are (so far) less common. This study uses a concrete example in an attempt to evaluate a research institute from the area of social sciences and humanities with the help of data from Google Scholar (GS). In order to use GS for a bibliometric study, we developed procedures for the normalization of citation impact, building on the procedures of classical bibliometrics. In order to test the convergent validity of the normalized citation impact scores, we calculated normalized scores for a subset of the publications based on data from the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. Even if scores calculated with the help of GS and the WoS/Scopus are not identical for the different publication types (considered here), they are so similar that they result in the same assessment of the institute investigated in this study: For example, the institute's papers whose journals are covered in the WoS are cited at about an average rate (compared with the other papers in the journals).

Bibliometric and benchmark analysis of gold Open Access in Spain: big output and little impact

Estudio bibliométrico que analiza la contribución de los científicos españoles a las revistas en acceso abierto indexadas en la Web of Science durante 2005-2014. El objetivo es determinar si la publicación en revistas en acceso abierto contribuye a mejorar los indicadores bibliométricos de impacto y colaboración de la ciencia española. Los resultados se presentan por áreas científicas y se comparan con un conjunto de 17 países europeos. Los resultados establecen que España es el segundo país europeo con un mayor porcentaje trabajos en acceso abierto (9%), especialmente en Arte y Humanidades (28%). Se establece como la citación normalizada (0,72) de la producción en acceso abierto está por debajo de la media mundial y de los valores de las principales potencias europeas. Finalmente se discute como los resultados entran en contradicción con la denominada ventaja de citación del acceso abierto.