Search results

The study showcases the social impact (online attention) of funded research compared to nonfunded for the BRICS nations. The key themes achieving online attention across the funded and nonfunded publications have also been identified.

A total of 1,507,931 articles published across the BRICS nations for a period of three (03) years were downloaded from the Clarivate Analytics' InCites database of Web of Science (WoS). “Funding Acknowledgement Analysis (FAA)” was used to identify the funded and nonfunded publications. The altmetric score of the top highly cited (1%) publications was gauged from the largest altmetric data provider, “Altmetric.com”, using the DOI of each publication. One-way ANOVA test was used to know the impact of funding on the mentions (altmetrics) across different data sources covered by Altmetric.com. The highly predominant keywords (hotspots) have been mapped using bibliometric software, “VOSviewer”.

The mentions across all the altmetric sources for funded research are higher compared to nonfunded research for all nations. It indicates the altmetric advantage for funded research, as funded publications are more discussed, tweeted, shared and have more readers and citations; thus, acquiring more social impact/online attention compared to nonfunded publications. The difference in means for funded and nonfunded publications varies across various altmetric sources and nations. Further, the authors’ keyword analysis reveals the prominence of the respective nation names in publications of the BRICS.

The study showcases the utility of indexing the funding information and whether research funding increases social impact return (online attention). It presents altmetrics as an important impact assessment and evaluation framework indicator, adding one more dimension to the research performance. The linking of funding information with the altmetric score can be used to assess the online attention and multi-flavoured impact of a particular funding programme and source/agency of a nation so that necessary strategies would be framed to improve the reach and impact of funded research. It identifies countries that achieve significant online attention for their funded publications compared to nonfunded ones, along with the key themes that can be utilised to frame research and investment plans.

The study represents the social impact of funded research compared to nonfunded across the BRICS nations.

This study aims to review the current status of quality management (QM) research in Arab countries between 2001 and 2020.

The study adopted the content analysis methodology, searching through various databases and search engines for relevant publications using several keywords. The selected publications were classified according to several criteria and the obtained results were presented in the form of frequencies and percentages.

Most research publications regarding QM were journal articles. The number of publications has steadily increased between 2001 and 2020. Moreover, QM research largely uses the quantitative research design. Questionnaire surveys are widely used as a data collection method; basic statistical analysis techniques are commonly employed to analyze the data. There is a tendency toward empirical research versus conceptual research. A few journal articles were published in reputed peer-reviewed international journals with low citation. Overall, Arab scholars research on QM and related topics over the past two decades is not significant for the field considering the number of published papers, citations and the papers published in reputed peer-reviewed international journals.

This study has several limitations. First, it does not cover non-English information sources due to the overall lack of Arabic publication databases. Second, it uses a limited number of criteria to classify the selected publications. Third, it adopts the content analysis methodology to classify the selected publications. This method has several limitations, which may negatively affect the results. Nevertheless, the study offers several implications for research scholars, educators and practitioners.

This is the first study to attempt a comprehensive overview of the state of research on QM in Arab countries between 2001 and 2020 using the content analysis methodology.

The major purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of openness to change on research publication in higher education institutions (HEI) in Tanzania.

With a sample of 247 academics, a cross-sectional survey design was used and questionnaires were the primary data collection tool. The collected data were tested using mean and standard deviations, and the causal–effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables was tested using simple linear regression.

The findings of this study revealed that openness to change positively and significantly influence research publication in higher education (β = 0.598 and p < 0.001).

The study recommends that HEI should consider openness to change value as one among criteria for hiring academics as well as developing good programs that will help academics develop the academics' self-awareness with regard to what takes for one to be a productive researcher.

This is the first study to examine the influence of openness to change as a personal value on academics’ research publication in Tanzanian HEI. In this instance, the study contributes to the existing literature on the influence of academics' personal values in terms of openness to change on research publication.

This study aims to investigate the research productivity in terms of publications count of the top four premiers Indian Institute of Management (IIM) institutions and to explore the current research trends.

Bibliometric techniques were employed to assess the performance in terms of research productivity of authors affiliated with IIMs. The Elsevier Scopus database was selected as a tool to extract the prospective publications data limiting the time frame for 2010–2021. The IIM-Ahmedabad, IIM-Bangalore, IIM-Calcutta and IIM-Lucknow have been selected for the study. The harvested data were analyzed by using the standard bibliometric indicators and scientometric parameters to measure the research landscape such as average growth rate, compound average growth rate, relative growth rate, doubling time, degree of collaboration, collaborative index, collaborative coefficient and modified collaborative coefficient. VOSviewer 1.6.17, BibExcel and Microsoft Excel were used for data analysis and visualization.

The research productivity of selected four IIMs has shown an upward trend during the study period from 2010–2021 and accrued 4,397 publications with an average of 366 publications per year. The authorship patterns demonstrate the collaborative trends as most of the publications were produced by the multiple-authors (81.03%). IIM-Ahmedabad has produced the maximum number of publications (32.20%). The research productivity of IIMs has come out in collaboration with the 125 nations across the world and the USA, the UK, Canada, Germany and China are the front runners with IIMs in the collaborative network. The high magnitude and density of collaboration are evident from the calculated mean values of the degree of collaboration (0.82). The mean values of the collaborative index (2.64), collaborative coefficient (0.51) and modified collaborative coefficient (0.51) demonstrated a positive trend, but indicate the fluctuation in the collaborative pattern as time proceeds.

The study is limited to the publications data indexed in the Scopus database, therefore the outcome may not be generalized across other databases available in the public domain like Web of Science (WoS), PubMed, Dimensions and Google Scholars.

The findings of the study may aid academics and library professionals in identifying research trends, collaboration networks and evaluating other academic and research institutions by using the current advancement in data analysis.

The present study is the first effort to evaluate the research productivity of IIMs. The expanding literature will make an important contribution to identifying patterns and evaluating current research trends on a worldwide scale.

This study concentrates on assessing the research productivity in the domain of social media security in the past decades. The purpose of this study is to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric review on social media using various bibliometric indicators.

A total of 8,121 scientific publications were retrieved from Scopus database from period 1998 to 2021 using associated keyword search. This study also used VOSviewer^© tool to evaluate the network visualisation.

The result of this study revealed that there is a steady growth of annual publications except for the years 2015 and 2016. A total of 8,121 scientific publications and 80,454 total citations were found with 11.2 average citations per publication. The USA, China and India were top productive countries in terms of publishing research in the field; Chinese Academy of Sciences secured top position with 126 publications in highly productive organisation in the domain. The lecture notes in computer science from Springer Nature received a highly produced title with 553 publications and 4,453 total citations. For co-occurrence of author’s keywords, network visualisation analysis revealed that “Social Media”, “Social Network”, “Security”, “Privacy” and “Trust” found maximum occurrence in the domain of social media security.

This study provides comprehensive research status of social media security by performing a bibliometric analysis. The findings of this study will help relevant researchers to understand the research trend, pursue scientific collaborators and enhance research topic preferences.

The rareness of this study, detailed bibliometric analysis on the domain of social media security, is proven using numerous bibliometric indicators and application of VOSviewer in the domain.

Mucormycosis has evolved as a post-COVID-19 complication globally, especially in India. The research on fungus has been very primitive, and many scientific publications have been discovered. The current COVID-19 pandemic needs further investigation into this unusual fungal infection. This review study aims to provide a pen-picture to researchers, science policymakers and scientists about different bibliometric indicators related to the research literature on mucormycosis.

The quantitative research was conducted using the established procedure of bibliometric investigation on data collected from Scopus from 2011 to 2020 using a validated search query. The search query consisted of keywords “Mucormycosis” or “Mucormycoses” or “Mucormycose” or “Mucorales Infection” or “Mucorales Infections” or “Black Fungus Infection” or “Black Fungus Infections” or “Zygomycosis” in the “Title-Keyword-Abstract” search option for data extraction. The analysis of data is performed using MS-Excel. Mapping was done with state-of-the-art visualization tools Biblioshiny and VOSviewer, using bibliometric indicators as units of analysis.

The analysis reveals that the first publication on this topic was reported from 1923 onwards. In total, 9,423 authors contributed 1,896 papers with 11,437 collaborated authors, documents per author are 0.201, authors per document are 4.97 and co-authors per document are 6.03. Total records were published in 779 journals in the English language from 75 countries globally. Mucormycosis literature is mostly open access, with 1,210 publications available via different open access routes. The highest number of articles (204) published in the journal “Mycoses” with 1,333 authors received 4,875 cited references, and the h-index has 24. The growth of publications is exponential, as depicted by the Price Law. The USA has recorded a maximum number of publications at both country and institutional levels compared to the other nations. There has been extensive research on mucormycosis before the outbreak as a post-COVID complication, as indicated by the highest number of publications in 2019.

The research hot spots have altered from “Mucormycosis,” “fungi,” “Zygomycosis” and “Drug efficacy”, “Drug Safety” to “Microbiology,” “Pathology,” “nucleotide sequence,” “surgical debridement” which indicates that potential area of research in the near future will be concerned with more extensive research in mucormycosis to develop standard treatment procedures to fight this infection. The quantity of scientific publications has also increased over time. The research and health community are called upon to join forces to activate existing knowledge, generate new insights and develop decision-supporting tools for health authorities in different nations to leverage vaccination in its transformational role toward successfully attaining nil cases of COVID-19.

The analysis of collaboration, findings, the research networks and visualization makes this study novel and separates from traditional metrics analysis. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this work is original, and no similar studies have been found with the objectives included here.

This study aims to measure the global research landscape of the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) of India on a set of quantitative and qualitative metrics in terms of research output toward exploring research trends and give an overview of collaborative practices by researchers of NIPERs.

The present study has selected the Scopus database as a tool to retrieve potential publications of studied NIPERs during the last 12 years (2010–2021). NIPER-Mohali, NIPER-Hyderabad, NIPER-Ahmedabad, NIPER-Guwahati and NIPER-Kolkata have been selected for the study. The study has adopted a comprehensive search strategy to extract 3,926 publications data. VOS viewer 1.6.17, BibExcel and Microsoft Excel were used for data analysis and visualization.

The global scientific research output of NIPERs accrued 3,926 publications with an average of 327 publications per year. The retrieved publications fetched a total of 67,772 citations with an average citation impact of 17.26. There observed a steady growth of publications from 168 to 509 registered with an average growth rate of 18.44%. The mean relative growth rate and doubling time of research output are 0.26 and 2.94. The authorship patterns explore collaborative trends as most of the publications were published by multiple authors (99.39%). NIPERs have expanded their outreach to collaborate with the USA, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Australia and the UK to collaborate on research and regulatory reforms exhibits in the USA as a major contributor.

The present study is the first effort to evaluate the global research productivity of NIPERs and assess the current research trends on a set of quantitative and qualitative metrics to provide some insights into the complex dynamics of research productivity. The study’s outcome may help to identify the current research progress of NIPERs at the global level.

Assessing the research performance of researchers offers inducement toward excellence in research. This study aims to analyze the research productivity of the most prolific authors of Pakistan considering their trends toward publications, citations and collaboration.

Top 100 authors from the top 10 Pakistani universities from Web of Science over the 10 years with the rigorous data cleaning process were selected. Scientometric analysis techniques were carried out to evaluate the research profile of these authors.

The findings revealed that majority of the productive authors were male working in the position of Professor in the physical sciences area. The publications and citations gradually increase with time. They preferred to collaborate for their publications, while first authorship publications were found less in number. Moreover, the propensity to collaborate at the international level increases double-fold from the first five years to the next five years period. In addition, the position of the authors was explored among different performance metrics. The finding exhibits variation in the ranking of authors among them. The impact of numbers of authors, funding status, publication of articles, presence of collaboration and international collaboration on the dependent variable and citation count was insignificant. However, the publication of review papers has a significant impact on the citation counts.

Findings have significant implications for policymakers to make maximum opportunities for researchers to strengthen linkages for collaboration and increase the funding prospects.

Studies on this topic are scarce, and therefore, this study provides useful recommendations to researchers and institutes to improve research productivity.

With the emergence of the different Industry 4.0 technologies and the interconnectedness between the physical and cyber components within manufacturing systems, the manufacturing environment is becoming more susceptible to unexpected disruptions, and manufacturing systems need to be even more resilient than before. Hence, the purpose of this work is to explore how does incorporating Industry 4.0 into current manufacturing systems affects (positively or negatively) its resiliency.

A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was performed with a focus on studying the manufacturing system’s resilience when applying Industry 4.0 technologies. The SLR is composed of four phases, which are (1) questions formulation, (2) determining an adequate search strategy, (3) publications filtering and (4) analysis and interpretation.

From the SLR results’ analysis, four potential research opportunities are proposed related to conducting additional research within the research themes in this field, considering less studied Industry 4.0 technologies or more than one technology, investigating the impact of some technologies on manufacturing system’s resilience, exploring more avenues to incorporate resiliency to preserve the state of the system, and suggesting metrics to quantify the resilience of manufacturing systems.

Although there are a number of publications discussing the resiliency of manufacturing systems, none fully investigated this topic when different Industry 4.0 technologies have been considered. In addition to determining the current research state-of-art in this relatively new research area and identifying potential future research opportunities, the main value of this work is in providing insights about this research area across three different perspectives/streams: (1) Industry 4.0 technologies, (2) resiliency and (3) manufacturing systems and their intersections.

This article explores whether six broad categories of activities undertaken by Canadian business scholars’ academics: publications record, citations record, teaching load, administrative load, consulting activities, and knowledge spillovers transfer, are complementary, substitute, or independent, as well as the conditions under which complementarities, substitution and independence among these activities are likely to occur.

A multivariate probit model is estimated to take into account that business scholars have to consider simultaneously whether or not to undertake many different academic activities. Metrics from Google Scholar of scholars from 35 Canadian business schools, augmented by a survey data on factors explaining the productivity and impact performances of these faculty members, are used to explain the heterogeneities between the determinants of these activities.

Overall, the results reveal that there are complementarities between publications and citations, publications and knowledge spillovers transfer, citations and consulting, and between consulting and knowledge spillovers transfer. The results also suggest that there are substitution effects between publications and teaching, publications and administrative load, citations and teaching load, and teaching load and administrative load. Moreover, results show that public and private funding, business schools’ reputation, scholar’s relational resources, and business school size are among the most influential variables on the scholar’s portfolio of activities.

This study considers simultaneously the scholar’s whole portfolio of activities. Moreover, the determinants considered in this study to explain scholars’ engagement in different activities reconcile two conflicting perspectives: (1) the traditional self-managed approach of academics, and (2) the outcomes-focused approach of university management.