Scientometrics最新文献

Introduction: Parkinson disease is the world's second most prevalent neurological disease. In this disease, intracytoplasmic neuronal inclusions are observed in enteric neurons in the gastrointestinal tract, and the composition of the intestinal microbiome is altered. These changes correlate with the motor phenotype. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of using probiotics in Parkinson disease.

Methods: Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and Ovıd-LWW were searched until April 2021. A total of 27395 records were found according to inclusion and exclusion criteria with the following outcomes: Parkinson disease rating, oxidative stress, and gastrointestinal system markers. Data search, article selection, and data extraction assessments were performed according to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. The Jadad scale was used to rate the evidence's quality.

Results: Our study information was gathered from 5 randomized controlled trials involving 350 individuals with Parkinson disease receiving probiotic supplements. Parkinson disease rating and non-motor symptoms test were performed in the samples. Also, oxidative stress (glutathione, malondialdehyde) and gastrointestinal system symptoms (bowel opening frequency, gut transit time, complete bowel movement, spontaneous bowel movements) were evaluated during 4-12 weeks of using probiotics in these patients.

Conclusion: While all high-quality studies demonstrate improvement in disease symptoms of the patients, currently sufficient data are not available to recommend the use of probiotics for people with Parkinson disease in clinical practice.

The massive growth in scholarly outputs during the last few decades has resulted into the creation of several scholarly databases to index the outputs. These scholarly databases index publication records and provide different metadata fields for different kinds of usage ranging from retrieval and research evaluation to various scientometric analysis. The ‘author keywords’ is one such important metadata field provided by many databases and used for different text-based and thematic structure analysis. The Dimensions database, however, does not provide ‘author keywords’ metadata field, instead it provides automatically generated terms from the article full texts, called ‘concepts’. Therefore, it is not clear whether different text-based analysis can be done with data provided by Dimensions database. Therefore, this article explores the distributional characteristics of Dimensions concepts. The Dimensions concept data obtained for a sufficiently large sample of scholarly articles is analysed through rank frequency distribution plots in the log–log space. Existence of Zipfian distribution is explored. The results indicate that Dimensions concepts adhere to the Zipfian properties which in turn indicates that Dimensions concepts have similar distributional characteristics as author keywords and hence they may have the same expressive power as that of author or index keywords for scientometric exercises. The study is novel as it is the first study to explore the distributional characteristics of the Dimensions concepts, particularly with respect to Zipfian properties, which provide the statistical foundation for understanding the Dimensions concepts and help to model and analyse them.

From the viewpoints of universalism and particularism, this paper investigates the process of recommendation by focusing on peer review for the Nobel Prize for Science from 1901 to 1970. The results indicate that self-recommendation practices are routine, especially in developed countries, and that the recommendation network is fundamentally built on mutually beneficial relationships between countries. The analysis also reveals that political, economic, military, biological, and colonial factors irrelevant to scientific performance impact the recommendations. During the study period, the Cold War evoked severe tensions between the Western and Eastern Blocs and influenced recommendations on each side; political and military factors also played a role. The main findings imply apparent evidence for particularism, indicating the presence of bias in the recommendation process. This paper provides suggestions for improvement of the selection process for the Nobel Committee.

Accurate identification and classification of “multidisciplinary” journals is crucial in scientometrics for revealing scientific structure and evaluating journals. Using Web of Science data from 2016 to 2020, we calculated disciplinary diversity of 12,225 journals based on paper-level subject classifications. We conducted a systematic analysis comparing Journal Citation Reports (JCR) multidisciplinary journals versus non-multidisciplinary journals. Results showed most JCR multidisciplinary journals have high disciplinary diversity, while non-multidisciplinary journals tend to have lower diversity. Some multidisciplinary journals with low diversity may be misclassified. We also found inconsistencies in journal disciplinary diversity at three granularity levels of the classification system. Visual analysis identified four distribution types of multidisciplinary journal diversity. Furthermore, ten potential multidisciplinary journals were identified in non-multidisciplinary JCR categories. Analysis of these journals showed two distinct publishing behaviors—some continuously publish across multiple fields, while others constantly change focus between fields.

Abstract

This study offers a detailed examination of scientific collaboration between Cuba and China, focusing on research publications in journals indexed in WoS and Scopus between 1990 and 2022. The findings shed light on a remarkable upward trajectory in collaborative efforts between these two nations, showcasing a 30-fold increase in co-authored articles in 2022 compared to 1990. Within this burgeoning landscape of collaboration, the study underscores that the majority of these publications (91.1%) are concentrated in Natural and Health Sciences. It is evident that China has taken the lead in partnering with Cuba in pioneering fields such as Physics & Astronomy, Clinical Medicine, and Biomedical Research. This fact underscores the vital role of this partnership in advancing knowledge frontiers and the practical applications of these disciplines. Furthermore, the study brings to the forefront the impressive growth of the Cuban scientific collaboration network, doubling in size from 1990 to 2022. This development signifies not only the quantity but also the quality of collaborations, reflecting positively on the scientific research endeavors of both countries. The study’s findings not only validate the significance of this collaboration but also offer a glimpse into its promising future, emphasizing the importance of sustained cooperation in addressing complex global challenges and advancing scientific knowledge.

Doctoral studies play a vital role in socializing young individuals in science as they navigate the challenges of modern knowledge-based societies. Taking various forms and intensities, the mentor–mentee relationship is integral to this process. The paper therefore addresses the temporal patterns of scientific collaboration between mentors and mentees, as well as among co-mentors, given that understanding the characteristics of mentoring collaborations is essential for developing successful higher education strategies for attracting potential doctoral students and designing effective science policies. Patterns of collaboration were identified using a symbolic data clustering approach and described using linear discriminant analysis. The data come from national information systems in Slovenia and cover the period between 1991 and 2020. On the mentor–mentee level, six types of scientific collaborations were identified and classified in three broader categories: study-limited, already established, and born and raised. The most common, born and raised, is characterized by students who are isolated from the scientific community at the beginning of their studies and have become well integrated into the scientific community and highly productive researchers by the time they complete their doctoral studies. The study-limited collaboration pattern is becoming increasingly popular and more common in the natural and technical sciences. The already established is more common among older mentees. The notion that mentoring promotes long-term scientific collaboration between mentors is not confirmed by the presented study. However, higher levels of collaboration between mentors are associated with younger age, working in the same scientific discipline, and younger mentors.

Abstract

The unusual citation profile of the 1985 Physics Nobel Prize paper has been analyzed. The number of citing papers per year exhibits a maximum of 123 citations in the mid-1980s and increases to more than 200 citations about two decades later. The publication set of the citing papers was analyzed in terms of co-authorships and research topics. The USA and (more recently) the People’s Republic of China appear prominently among the countries of the citing authors. A keyword analysis of the citing papers revealed research dealing with topological insulators as one of the major newly evolving research topics. An analysis of the co-cited papers has been performed via reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS). The most-frequently co-cited papers (the peak papers of the RPYS spectrogram) were identified and discussed. As a result, we found two primary booster papers and three secondary booster papers that renewed the interest in the 1985 Physics Nobel Prize paper.

This study explores how scientometric data and indicators are used to transform science systems in a selection of countries in the Middle East and North Africa. I propose that scientometric-based rules inform such transformation. First, the research shows how research managers adopt scientometrics as ‘global standards’. I also show how several scientometric data and indicators are adopted following a ‘glocalization’ process. Finally, I demonstrate how research managers use this data to inform decision-making and policymaking processes. This study contributes to a broader understanding of the usage of scientometric indicators in the context of assessing research institutions and researchers based on their publishing activities. Related to these assessments, I also discuss how such data transforms and adapts local science systems to meet so-called ‘global standards’.

Co-authored publications can bring positive results for those who participate, such as gaining additional expertise, accessing more funding or increasing the publication impact. China, the European Union, and the United States have been collaborating between each other throughout the years in the field of Computer Science. These collaborations varied over time, as well as they impacted the regions in different ways. In this paper, we collected the publications from these territories across 31 years on the topic of Computer Science and studied them focusing on how the regions have approached co-authorship. In particular, we have analyzed the number of collaborations during that period, the impact of those papers measured as the number of citations, and the topics that have been researched. We conclude that China’s focus on Computer Science fields has led it to be the most productive region in recent years; plus, it has benefited from the American and European reputation, by increasing its citation rates when collaborating with them. On the other hand, the EU and the US have benefited from Chinese interest in computer science, increasing the number of publications together.

Although the number of journals that have adopted the registered report format has increased rapidly in recent years, they still account for only a tiny portion of academic journals. This article provides a summary and overview of the number and proportion of journals that accept the registered report format in the various scientific domains. The Center for Open Science was searched for journals that have adopted the registered report as a regular submission option. The numbers of such journals in each scientific domain were then counted based on their group and category classification in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). In July 2023, 278 journals had adopted the registered report format, with 186 of these journals included in the JCR. The percentage of journals that had adopted the registered report format ranged from 0 to 7% across the different major research fields (groups in JCR) and from 0 to 34% across the research subfields (categories in JCR). The group “Psychiatry/Psychology” and category “Psychology, Experimental” had the highest percentage of journals that had adopted registered reports. Four large-scale replication projects have been published, focusing on psychology, social science, medicine, and economics, respectively. Although all four studies showed unsatisfactory replication success rates, ≤ 1% of the journals in the corresponding scientific domains had adopted registered reports, with the exception of psychology (7%). To improve research reliability and transparency, it is critical to increase the use of the registered report publishing format.