Scientific output scales with resources. A comparison of US and European universities.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lepori B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6793846 | biostudies-literature | 2019
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Scientific output scales with resources. A comparison of US and European universities.
Lepori Benedetto B Geuna Aldo A Mira Antonietta A
PloS one 20191015 10
By using a comprehensive dataset of US and European universities, we demonstrate super-linear scaling between university revenues and their volume of publications and (field-normalized) citations. We show that this relationship holds both in the US and in Europe. In terms of resources, our data show that three characteristics differentiate the US system: (1) a significantly higher level of resources for the entire system, (2) a clearer distinction between education-oriented institutions and doct ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Introduction PhD is the highest awarded degree offered by universities in different disciplines. Owners of a PhD can teach at universities, start independent research and receive a higher salary while further building a scientific career. We examined whether the publication output before the PhD degree has a correlation with subsequent research activities. Methods We downloaded publication and citation data from the Hungarian Scientific Bibliography for Hungarian researchers who obtained PhD between the ages of 24 and 45. The researchers were grouped into eleven scientific sections. We examined the number of Q1 publications published in the previous 5 years, the H-index, the total number of citations for the last complete year, and the biological age of the researcher. Each parameter was computed for the year at which the PhD was obtained and ten years later. Pre-PhD publications (and citations for these) were excluded when assessing post-PhD track records. Spearman rank correlation and Kruskal-Wallis test were computed. Results We analyzed all together 4,790 researchers. We obtained a positive correlation between the number of Q1 publications before and after PhD (corr. coeff. = 0.21–0.54, p<0.01 in all sections), between the H-index before and after PhD (corr. coeff. = 0.32–0.56, p<0.01 in all sections), and between the citations received before and after PhD (corr. coeff. = 0.34–0.51, p<0.01 in all sections). All three metrics measured ten years after the PhD were negatively correlated with the age of the researcher at the time of obtaining the PhD (number of publications corr. coeff. = -0.09–0.22, p<0.05; H-index corr. coeff. = -0.09–0.29, p<0.08; number of citations corr. coeff. = -0.14–0.30, p<0.01). Among all disciplines, Philosophy and History and Engineering sciences show the strongest correlation between pre- and post-PhD output. When running multiple regression analysis for all three metrics as dependent variables and the number of articles, the H-index, the number of citations in the year of the PhD, the calendar year of PhD, and the gender of the researcher as independent variables, the number of articles and the H-index in the year of PhD reached the strongest positive correlations while gender had a negative correlation. Conclusions We independently evaluated pre- and post-PhD publication performance. In connection with age, the discipline-specific reference values of scientometric parameters at the time of obtaining the PhD can help to select candidates for postdoctoral grants and positions.
| S-EPMC9328526 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Studies of research policies and scientific production are essential for strengthening educational systems and achieving objectives such as quality improvement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of research policies on the scientific production of public and private Peruvian universities. An observational, descriptive, secondary analysis study of the research policies of 92 universities and two graduate schools licensed by the National Superintendence of Higher Education of Peru (SUNEDU) was conducted for the period from 2016-2020. Scientific publications from educational institutions were collected from Scopus and Web of Science for the study period, and researchers certified by the National Council of Science and Technology of Peru (CONCYTEC) were divided by group and level. Multiple regression analysis was performed using two models. The analysis indicated that research policies did not influence scientific production in Scopus or Web of Science in either 2019 or 2020 (Model I) but that type of management (p < 0.01), number of National Scientific, Technological, and Technological Innovation Registry (RENACYT) researchers (p < 0.001) and 2016 scientific production (p < 0.001) did influence production when these variables were incorporated into the model (Model II). However, time of licensing and management type had no effects. The number of research policies implemented by Peruvian universities and licensed graduate schools was not large. Therefore, it is recommended that project funding policies, research training, and research collaboration be strengthened and that the management capacity of research centers and institutes be increased.
| S-EPMC8162649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Based on the decision-theoretical conditions underlying the selection of events for news coverage in science journalism, this article uses a novel input-output analysis to investigate which of the more than eight million scientific study results published between August 2014 and July 2018 have been selected by global journalism to a relevant degree. We are interested in two different structures in the media coverage of scientific results. Firstly, the structure of sources that journalists use, i.e. scientific journals, and secondly, the congruence of the journalistic selection of single results. Previous research suggests that the selection of sources and results follows a certain heavy-tailed distribution, a power law. Mathematically, this distribution can be described with a function of the form C*x-α. We argue that the exponent of such power law distributions can potentially be an indicator to describe selectivity in journalism on a high aggregation level. In our input-output analysis, we look for such patterns in the coverage of all scientific results published in the database Scopus over four years. To get an estimate of the coverage of these results, we use data from the altmetrics provider Altmetric, more precisely their Mainstream-Media-Score (MSM-Score). Based on exploratory analyses, we define papers with a score of 50 or above as Social Impact Papers (SIPs). Over our study period, we identified 5,833 SIPs published in 1,236 journals. For both the distribution of the source selection and the distribution of the selection of single results, an exponentially truncated power law is a better fit than the power law, mostly because we find a steeper decline in the tail of the distributions.
| S-EPMC7657513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We examined the perceived importance of scientific resources for decision-making among local health department (LHD) practitioners in the United States.We used data from LHD practitioners (n = 849). Respondents ranked important decision-making resources, methods for learning about public health research, and academic journal use. We calculated descriptive statistics and used logistic regression to measure associations of individual and LHD characteristics with importance of scientific resources.Systematic reviews of scientific literature (24.7%) were most frequently ranked as important among scientific resources, followed by scientific reports (15.9%), general literature review articles (6.5%), and 1 or a few scientific studies (4.8%). Graduate-level education (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] = 1.7-3.5), larger LHD size (AORs = 2.0-3.5), and leadership support (AOR = 1.6; 95% confidence interval = 1.1, 2.3) were associated with a higher ranking of importance of scientific resources.Graduate training, larger LHD size, and leadership that supports a culture of evidence-based decision-making may increase the likelihood of practitioners viewing scientific resources as important. Targeting communication channels that practitioners view as important can also guide research dissemination strategies.
| S-EPMC4355705 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs the amount of scientific data grows, peer-reviewed Scientific Data Analysis Resources (SDARs) such as published software programs, databases and web servers have had a strong impact on the productivity of scientific research. SDARs are typically linked to using an Internet URL, which have been shown to decay in a time-dependent fashion. What is less clear is whether or not SDAR-producing group size or prior experience in SDAR production correlates with SDAR persistence or whether certain institutions or regions account for a disproportionate number of peer-reviewed resources.MethodsWe first quantified the current availability of over 26,000 unique URLs published in MEDLINE abstracts/titles over the past 20 years, then extracted authorship, institutional and ZIP code data. We estimated which URLs were SDARs by using keyword proximity analysis.ResultsWe identified 23,820 non-archival URLs produced between 1996 and 2013, out of which 11,977 were classified as SDARs. Production of SDARs as measured with the Gini coefficient is more widely distributed among institutions (.62) and ZIP codes (.65) than scientific research in general, which tends to be disproportionately clustered within elite institutions (.91) and ZIPs (.96). An estimated one percent of institutions produced 68% of published research whereas the top 1% only accounted for 16% of SDARs. Some labs produced many SDARs (maximum detected = 64), but 74% of SDAR-producing authors have only published one SDAR. Interestingly, decayed SDARs have significantly fewer average authors (4.33 +/- 3.06), than available SDARs (4.88 +/- 3.59) (p < 8.32 × 10-4). Approximately 3.4% of URLs, as published, contain errors in their entry/format, including DOIs and links to clinical trials registry numbers.ConclusionSDAR production is less dependent upon institutional location and resources, and SDAR online persistence does not seem to be a function of infrastructure or expertise. Yet, SDAR team size correlates positively with SDAR accessibility, suggesting a possible sociological factor involved. While a detectable URL entry error rate of 3.4% is relatively low, it raises the question of whether or not this is a general error rate that extends to additional published entities.
| S-EPMC4251054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The laboratory mouse is the premier animal model for studying human disease and thousands of mutants have been identified or produced, most recently through gene-specific mutagenesis approaches. High throughput strategies by the International Knockout Mouse Consortium (IKMC) are producing mutants for all protein coding genes. Generating a knock-out line involves huge monetary and time costs so capture of both the data describing each mutant alongside archiving of the line for distribution to future researchers is critical. The European Mouse Mutant Archive (EMMA) is a leading international network infrastructure for archiving and worldwide provision of mouse mutant strains. It operates in collaboration with the other members of the Federation of International Mouse Resources (FIMRe), EMMA being the European component. Additionally EMMA is one of four repositories involved in the IKMC, and therefore the current figure of 1700 archived lines will rise markedly. The EMMA database gathers and curates extensive data on each line and presents it through a user-friendly website. A BioMart interface allows advanced searching including integrated querying with other resources e.g. Ensembl. Other resources are able to display EMMA data by accessing our Distributed Annotation System server. EMMA database access is publicly available at http://www.emmanet.org.
| S-EPMC2808872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Physiotherapy research supports the advancement of evidence-based practice and development of a highly skilled workforce. This study aims to visualize highly cited scientific output of Indian physiotherapists from 1999 to 2018. Methods: A descriptive study design was adopted to visualize highly cited scientific output of Indian physiotherapists using the Web of Science (WoS) database from 1999 to 2018. A search was carried out using the following term "((TS=(physiotherapy) OR TS=("physical rehabilitation") OR TS=("physical therapy")) AND AD=(India))Indexes=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, CPCI-S, CPCI-SSH, ESCI, CCR-EXPANDED, IC Timespan=1999-2018". Data collected were analyzed using Incites from WoS and VOSviewer software. Results: A total of 489 articles were published between 1999 and 2018, with a peak of 103 in 2016 with 2420 citations. A decline in publication count was observed after 2016. The journal International Journal of Physiotherapy published the highest number of articles (n=35). Manipal University (n=26) was found to be the most active institution for physiotherapy research in India, as determined by producing the most articles. Indian physiotherapists published the highest number of research articles in collaboration with US authors (n=24). Conclusion: There is an increasing trend in the scientific output of Indian physiotherapists over the past two decades; however, a decline is observed after 2016. It is recommended that research collaborations across the globe are increased and scientific output should be improved, leading to a higher number of citations. Future research should explore factors influencing scientific production of Indian physiotherapists and devise appropriate strategies to attain further improvement.
| S-EPMC7308915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Agencies that fund scientific research must chooseis it more effective to give large grants to a few elite researchers, or small grants to many researchers? Large grants would be more effective only if scientific impact increases as an accelerating function of grant size. Here, we examine the scientific impact of individual university-based researchers in three disciplines funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). We considered four indices of scientific impact: numbers of articles published, numbers of citations to those articles, the most cited article, and the number of highly cited articles, each measured over a four-year period. We related these to the amount of NSERC funding received. Impact is positively, but only weakly, related to funding. Researchers who received additional funds from a second federal granting council, the Canadian Institutes for Health Research, were not more productive than those who received only NSERC funding. Impact was generally a decelerating function of funding. Impact per dollar was therefore lower for large grant-holders. This is inconsistent with the hypothesis that larger grants lead to larger discoveries. Further, the impact of researchers who received increases in funding did not predictably increase. We conclude that scientific impact (as reflected by publications) is only weakly limited by funding. We suggest that funding strategies that target diversity, rather than "excellence", are likely to prove to be more productive.
| S-EPMC3686789 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundJob strain (i.e., high job demands combined with low job control) is a frequently used indicator of harmful work stress, but studies have often used partial versions of the complete multi-item job demands and control scales. Understanding whether the different instruments assess the same underlying concepts has crucial implications for the interpretation of findings across studies, harmonisation of multi-cohort data for pooled analyses, and design of future studies. As part of the 'IPD-Work' (Individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium, we compared different versions of the demands and control scales available in 17 European cohort studies.MethodsSix of the 17 studies had information on the complete scales and 11 on partial scales. Here, we analyse individual level data from 70 751 participants of the studies which had complete scales (5 demand items, 6 job control items).ResultsWe found high Pearson correlation coefficients between complete scales of job demands and control relative to scales with at least three items (r > 0.90) and for partial scales with two items only (r = 0.76-0.88). In comparison with scores from the complete scales, the agreement between job strain definitions was very good when only one item was missing in either the demands or the control scale (kappa > 0.80); good for job strain assessed with three demand items and all six control items (kappa > 0.68) and moderate to good when items were missing from both scales (kappa = 0.54-0.76). The sensitivity was > 0.80 when only one item was missing from either scale, decreasing when several items were missing in one or both job strain subscales.ConclusionsPartial job demand and job control scales with at least half of the items of the complete scales, and job strain indices based on one complete and one partial scale, seemed to assess the same underlying concepts as the complete survey instruments.
| S-EPMC3328260 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Published evidence on the progress of occupational therapy research from a broad perspective is limited. The purpose of this study was to analyze the international research productivity on occupational therapy from 1917 to 2020. This was a bibliometric study including articles indexed on MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINAHL. The literature search was conducted in June 2021 using the descriptor "occupational therapy" and the term "Ergotherap*", and was limited to citable documents. Price's law and Bradford's law were applied to analyze a number of bibliometric indicators. Research on occupational therapy had an average annual growth rate of 26.4% and followed an exponential model. The top producing countries were the USA (21.52%) and the UK (6.07%). There is a high transience index of 74.81%. The top producing author was Kielhofner, G. (n = 132). Studies with the highest reported scientific evidence accounted for 1.13% (n = 638) of the total number of publications. More randomized controlled trials are necessary to increase the quality of the evidence base. Moreover, a greater collaboration between authors is needed for the professionalization of this research field.
| S-EPMC8656659 | biostudies-literature