Research productivity on COVID-19 in Dimension database: An analytical study

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 63-69
Author(s):  
Jeyapragash Balasubramani, PhD ◽  
Muthuraj Anbalagan

This paper examines the publications on COVID-19 in Dimensions database. A total of 13,697 records for the year 2020 have been extracted and analyzed under various categories. MS-Excel has been used to analyze the data with simple calculations. It is found that the “proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” article has received highest Altmetric Score of 31,680 among the top 10 articles, and also it is found that “Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel corona virus in Wuhan, China” article has received the highest number of citations (1,400). The source “medRxiv” has published the highest number of research articles (1,314), and the source “The Lancet” has received the highest number of citations (4,915). The author “Elisabeth Mahase” has published more number of articles (41) on COVID-19.

2021 ◽  
pp. 112067212110425
Author(s):  
Parth A Patel ◽  
Rhea Gopali ◽  
Anvith Reddy ◽  
Kajol K Patel

Background: Limited research has examined differences between uncited papers and their most-cited counterparts. By comparing characteristics of each cohort, it is possible to better determine factors associated with increased citation count in the ophthalmology literature. Methods: We initially identified all research articles published in six popular general ophthalmology journals ( Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology, Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, American Journal of Ophthalmology, British Journal of Ophthalmology, and Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology) between 2001 and 2011. Forty-nine articles were identified as having accrued zero citations as of March 2021 and were compared with an equivalent number of articles with the highest number of citations published in the same journals and time period. Significance ( p < 0.05) for comparisons was determined using the Mann–Whitney U test and Fisher’s exact test. Results: Compared to the least-cited articles, the most-cited articles were significantly more likely to be clinical, multi-institutional, and multi-national in scope, report a statistically significant result, have a conflict of interest, state a funding source, and have higher sample sizes. These publications had significantly more words in the abstract and manuscript and more references. Overall, the first authors of the most-cited articles were significantly more likely to be female and report greater prior research productivity, as assessed by the relative citation ratio (RCR). Conclusion: Considering a small number of articles were uncited at least a decade after publication, it appears most research is useful for future investigations. However, there remain distinct differences between uncited articles and their most-cited equivalents in ophthalmology.


Author(s):  
Sumeer Gul ◽  
Sangita Gupta ◽  
Sumaira Jan ◽  
Sabha Ali

The study endeavors to highlight the contribution of women in the field of Political research globally. The study is based on the data gathered from journal, Political Analysis which comprises a list of articles published by authors for the period, 2004-2014. The proportion of the male and female authors listed in the publication was ascertained. There exists a colossal difference among male and female researchers in the field of Political Science research, which is evident from the fact that 88.30% of publications are being contributed by male authors while as just 11.70 % of publications are contributed by female authors. Furthermore, citation analysis reveals that highest number of citations is for the male contributions. In addition, the collaborative pattern indicates that largest share of the collaboration is between male-male authors. This evidently signifies that female researchers are still lagging behind in the field of Political Science research in terms of research productivity (publications)and thus, accordingly, need to excel in that particular field to overcome the gender difference. The study highlights status of women contribution in the Journal of Political Analysis from the period 2004-2014. The study provides a wider perspective of female research-contribution based on select parameters. However, the study can be further be enriched by taking into consideration various other criteria like what obstacles are faced by female researchers impeding their research, what are the effects of age and marital status on the research-productivity of female authors, etc.


Author(s):  
Clive Baldock

The citation impact of research articles contributes to the assessment of the research performance of universities in some international university ranking systems either as the number of citations per paper, number of citations per faculty, total number of citations, number of highly cited papers or percentage of highly cited papers. Publishing research articles in Open Access (OA) journals has the potential for increasing the citation impact of research articles and in so doing improve an institutions position in university rankings. This chapter reviews the evidence for an increase in citations through publishing in Open Access publications.


2020 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 967-979
Author(s):  
Stephan van der Zwaard ◽  
Arie-Willem de Leeuw ◽  
L. (Rens) A. Meerhoff ◽  
Sue C. Bodine ◽  
Arno Knobbe

Common measures of article impact are the Altmetric Attention Scores, number of downloads, and number of citations. To our knowledge, this is the first study that applies machine learning on a comprehensive collection of article characteristics to predict article attention scores, downloads, and citations. Using 10 years of research articles, we obtained accurate predictions of high-impact articles and discovered important article characteristics related to article impact.


Author(s):  
Raidell Avello Martínez ◽  
Terry Anderson

<p class="Body">Publication of research, innovation, challenges and successes is of critical importance to the evolution of more effective distance education programming. Publication in peer reviewed journal format is the most prestigious and the most widespread form of dissemination in education and most other disciplines, thus the importance of understanding what is published and its impact on both researchers and practitioners. In this article we identify and classify the leading articles in arguably the leading peer reviewed journals in this discipline.</p><p class="Body">The journal <em>The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning</em> (IRRODL) is a peer reviewed academic journal that has been published since 2000. The journal has published between 3 and 6 issues annually with between 50 and 111 research articles per volume. In order to assess the general and the particular impact of highly cited articles this work describes the main bibliometric indicators of the IRRODL journal and these are compared with the total galley views in all formats, PDF, HTML, EPUB and MP3, that IRRODL publishes. In addition to identifying characteristics of the most widely cited articles this research determines if there is a correlation between the articles most highly cited by other publishing researchers and the number of views, indicating interest from both practitioners and research communities. The results show a significant and positive relationship between the total number of citations and the number of views received by articles published in the journal, indicating the impact of the journal extends beyond active publishers to practitioner consumers.</p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 337
Author(s):  
Sunaina Khanna ◽  
Neeraj Kumar Singh ◽  
Deepika Tewari ◽  
Harinder Singh Saini

<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>


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Vamsi Reddy ◽  
Arjun Gupta ◽  
Michael D. White ◽  
Raghav Gupta ◽  
Prateek Agarwal ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEPublication metrics such as the Hirsch index (h-index) are often used to evaluate and compare research productivity in academia. The h-index is not a field-normalized statistic and can therefore be dependent on overall rates of publication and citation within specific fields. Thus, a metric that adjusts for this while measuring individual contributions would be preferable. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has developed a new, field-normalized, article-level metric called the “relative citation ratio” (RCR) that can be used to more accurately compare author productivity between fields. The mean RCR is calculated as the total number of citations per year of a publication divided by the average field-specific citations per year, whereas the weighted RCR is the sum of all article-level RCR scores over an author’s career. The present study was performed to determine how various factors, such as academic rank, career duration, a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree, and sex, impact the RCR to analyze research productivity among academic neurosurgeons.METHODSA retrospective data analysis was performed using the iCite database. All physician faculty affiliated with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited neurological surgery programs were eligible for analysis. Sex, career duration, academic rank, additional degrees, total publications, mean RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each individual. Mean RCR and weighted RCR were compared between variables to assess patterns of analysis by using SAS software version 9.4.RESULTSA total of 1687 neurosurgery faculty members from 125 institutions were included in the analysis. Advanced academic rank, longer career duration, and PhD acquisition were all associated with increased mean and weighted RCRs. Male sex was associated with having an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR score. Overall, neurological surgeons were highly productive, with a median RCR of 1.37 (IQR 0.93–1.97) and a median weighted RCR of 28.56 (IQR 7.99–85.65).CONCLUSIONSThe RCR and its derivatives are new metrics that help fill in the gaps of other indices for research output. Here, the authors found that advanced academic rank, longer career duration, and PhD acquisition were all associated with increased mean and weighted RCRs. Male sex was associated with having an increased weighted, but not mean, RCR score, most likely because of historically unequal opportunities for women within the field. Furthermore, the data showed that current academic neurosurgeons are exceptionally productive compared to both physicians in other specialties and the general scientific community.


2018 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Yu Heng Wong ◽  
Nicholas Y Q Tan ◽  
Charumathi Sabanayagam

We analysed the 100 top cited articles in ophthalmology to identify and characterise the most influential articles of the past four decades. Two independent investigators searched the Scopus database to determine the 100 most frequently cited articles in ophthalmology (T100-Eye) and general non-ophthalmology journals (T100-Gen) published from 1975 to December 2017. The T100-Eye list consisted of 83 original articles and 17 reviews, and the number of citations ranged from 582 to 2833. Seventy-eight of these articles were published in three journals alone (impact factor (IF): 5.05–8.2), led by the Archives of Ophthalmology. The T100-Gen list consisted of 84 original articles and 16 reviews and the number of citations ranged from 358 to 3272. Forty-five of these articles were published in four journals alone (IF: 9.66–72.41). In both lists, majority of the first authors were from the USA (T100-Eye, n=80; T100-Gen, n=66), and were men (n=76 in T100-Eye; n=72 in T100-Gen). With regard to the article type, in the T100-Eye, among the 83 original research articles, most were randomised controlled trials (n=26) or clinical observational studies related to description of a new condition or new management (n=26). In the T100-Gen, of the 84 original research articles, many were clinical observational studies (n=27) or basic science research (n=26). In both lists, the most frequently examined diseases were age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy and glaucoma. Our analysis reveals landmark articles, trends and medical advancements in ophthalmology over the past four decades. It also highlights gender disparity and influence of the USA in seminal ophthalmic research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-280

The aim of this descriptive analytical study was to examine research articles discussion sections from four disciplines to measure the functions and frequencies of hedges and boosters. To this end, scholarly research articles were randomly selected from leading and reputable journals in mechanical and industrial engineering as representatives of hard science disciplines and management and psychology as representatives of soft science disciplines. The size of the corpus in each discipline was around 17000 words. The data were analyzed in light of Hyland's (2005) model of interactional metadiscourse for hedges and boosters devices. Results of descriptive and inferential statistics showed that the use of hedges was significantly more in soft science disciples while boosters were overused in hard science disciplines, corresponding to the fact that by virtue of being less personal and more objective, hard sciences are represented through more frequent use of boosters than hedges to express facts. On the other hand, soft sciences are influenced by their subjectivity which results in higher frequencies of hedges. The findings of this study have implications for English for Academic/Specific purposes courses. Keywords: Discussion section, Research article, Metadiscourse, Booster, Hedge.


Author(s):  
Guyi Wang ◽  
Chenfang Wu ◽  
Quan Zhang ◽  
Fang Wu ◽  
Bo Yu ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document