Search results

This study aims to examine the research productivity of Pakistan Agricultural Research Council’s (PARC’s) researchers published during 2001–2020 by using scientometric indicators. The study explored the growth and collaborative trends along with authorship and institutional collaborative patterns at the national and international levels.

The study was conducted in four phases. Firstly, a search strategy was designed to retrieve reliable data sets. During the second phase, data from PARC research was retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). In the third phase, the data were combined, and duplications were removed. Finally, the data were analysed using RStudio and VOSviewer.

The study identified 2,868 research publications from 16 communication channels spanning over the period of 2001–2020. The growth rate varied during the study period and the year 2020 was the most productive year of the organization. Most of the research was produced in multi-authorship and five authors were dominant. Pakistan Journal of Botany was the most preferred and cited source. Moreover, PARC research collaboration with Pakistani researchers was more than their international counterparts.

Like other research, this research has some limitations. For example, this research is based on secondary data extracted from WoS and Scopus databases, world-renowned online academic. However, researchers should keep in mind while interpreting the results of this study. Secondly, the research publications published by PARC researchers during 2001–2020 were considered. Finally, this research considered English language literature only.

The study’s key theoretical contribution is its strategy for merging WoS and Scopus in RStudio, while its findings could assist agriculture research stakeholders in identifying new areas of research, awards, promotions and identification of research gaps.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first to use scientometric indicators to evaluate PARC’s research productivity. This detailed analysis provides a deeper understanding of PARC’s contribution to agriculture research and its potential implications.

The present study aims to trace out the science research output of top Indian universities from 2015 to 2019, as reflected in the Web of Science (WOS) database.

The present study has selected the Science Citation Index (SCI) of WOS core collection for selecting top Indian universities in terms of total publications in the last five years (2015–2019). The University of Delhi (DU), Banaras Hindu University (BHU), Anna University (AU), Jadavpur University (JU) and Punjab University (PU) have been selected. The study identified the most prolific authors, collaborating countries, collaborating institutions and the impact of their output in terms of citations per paper (CPP) and relative citation impact (RCI). For visualizing purposes, VOSviewer was used. The study also identified frequently used keywords and channels used for communicating research results.

The authors retrieved 26,173 documents consisting of journal articles, review papers and proceeding papers. The consistent growth of science research output has been observed. The University of Delhi (DU) has the maximum science publications. The study reflects that multi-authored papers have more research impact in terms of citation received. The USA, South Korea and Germany are the most collaborating countries. The top Indian Universities have a major collaboration with Anna University, Indian Institute of Technology, Center for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) of India.

The present study reveals how the science research output of top Indian universities has grown in the last few years. The findings of the study can be used for identifying specific science research areas where special attention can be given.

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.

This study aims to map the “Desktop Research” (DR) output in Pakistan, as part of the growing field of research globally. It also ascertains the productive institutions and prolific authors along with their collaboration patterns.

Bibliometric techniques were used to quantitatively analyze the DR published in Pakistan. The publications from 1981 to 2021 were retrieved from Scopus. A total of 1,802 publications were retrieved and used for analysis.

Results indicated an unpredictable increase in DR output from approximately 100 to 400 records during the past five years. The year 2020 was most productive in DR research showing the excess use of secondary data by researchers in COVID-19. The focus of researchers towards DR was consistently rising. Medical journals were found to publish DR extensively. Majority of the publications were contributed by collaborative work and researchers of the USA were found as the most collaborative with Pakistani authors. Publications of single category journals, open access journals and international collaboration get more citations.

The results of the analysis rely only on a single database, Scopus, for retrieving the publication data.

The study has practical implications for the policymakers and higher education development organizations to introduce the DR as a course in academic schools.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to review DR in the context of Pakistan through bibliometric analysis. This comprehensive overview provides a better understanding of the development of the field and possible practice implications.

The study aims to present an insight into the research landscape of Library and Information Science (LIS) by India using a bibliometric visualization tool. The study analyses the research growth and trends, highly cited articles, productive publication titles, institutional and country collaboration.

The data were downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection for a period of 20 years and analysed through VOSviewer, a data visualization software.

The results indicate that the overall annual contributions are increasing, although with uneven and slow growth from 2001 to 2014. However, the highest contributions and impact is witnessed over the past few years. All the top 10 cited papers are related to the area of information processing and management. The visualization technique made it clear that the area of research has made a transition from traditional concepts of library and information to novel ones involving big data, machine learning, altmetrics, etc. Also, the Indian Institute of Technology System, the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research and the Indian Institute of Management System have made the highest contributions. Furthermore, India shares maximum collaborations with the USA, followed by England and China.

The findings of this study would help readers to gain understanding about the contribution of India for the development of the LIS. It would also help researchers to identify the hotspots and left out areas of research in the Indian context that require further investigation, thus would help in policy decisions and future research. Furthermore, researchers will be sensitized about the network visualizations that can also help them to get connected with the peers. The study can also help the journals to recognize the trending topics, which will provide the researchers with the opportunities to work on the same. Funding agencies can also be benefitted by the findings of the current study as they will be informed about the research areas which need to be funded.

There are not many research studies that highlight the research trends in the area of LIS from India and visualize the collaboration among institutions and countries. The study tries to showcase the research trends and collaborative frameworks in the field of LIS in terms of network visualization.

Given the magnitude of the literature, a researcher must be selective of research papers and publications in general. In other words, only papers that meet strict standards of academic integrity and adhere to reliable and credible sources should be referenced. The purpose of this paper is to approach this issue from the prism of scientometrics according to the following research questions: Is it necessary to judge the quality of scientific production? How do we evaluate scientific production? What are the tools to be used in evaluation?

This paper presents a comparative study of scientometric evaluation practices and tools. A systematic literature review is conducted based on articles published in the field of scientometrics between 1951 and 2022. To analyze data, the authors performed three different aspects of analysis: usage analysis based on classification and comparison between the different scientific evaluation practices, type and level analysis based on classifying different scientometric indicators according to their types and application levels and similarity analysis based on studying the correlation between different quantitative metrics to identify similarity between them.

This comparative study leads to classify different scientific evaluation practices into externalist and internalist approaches. The authors categorized the different quantitative metrics according to their types (impact, production and composite indicators), their levels of application (micro, meso and macro) and their use (internalist and externalist). Moreover, the similarity analysis has revealed a high correlation between several scientometric indicators such as author h-index, author publications, citations and journal citations.

The interest in this study lies deeply in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of research groups and guides their actions. This evaluation contributes to the advancement of scientific research and to the motivation of researchers. Moreover, this paper can be applied as a complete in-depth guide to help new researchers select appropriate measurements to evaluate scientific production. The selection of evaluation measures is made according to their types, usage and levels of application. Furthermore, our analysis shows the similarity between the different indicators which can limit the overuse of similar measures.

This paper focuses on the differences in domain intellectual structure discovery between author bibliographic coupling analysis (ABCA) and author co-citation analysis (ACA) considering all authors. The purpose of this study is to examine whether and in what ways these two all-author network approaches yield different results.

The sample was collected from the database of Web of Science, including all articles published in Scientometrics and Journal of Informetrics from 2011 to 2020. First, 100 representative authors were selected from each set, and ABCA matrices and ACA matrices were constructed. Second, factor analysis was carried out on the matrices, to detect the intellectual structure of scientometrics and informetrics.

The intellectual structures identified by ABCA and ACA are similar overall, but the results differ somewhat when it comes to specific structures. The ABCA is more sensitive to some highly collaborative research teams and presents a clearer picture of current intellectual structures and trends while ACA seems to have some advantages in representing the more traditional and proven research topics in the field. The combined use of ABCA and ACA allows for a more comprehensive and specific intellectual structure of research fields.

This paper compares the performance of ABCA and ACA detecting the intellectual structure of the domain from the perspective of all authors, revealing the intellectual structure of scientometrics and informetrics comprehensively.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-12-2020-0540.

The purpose of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis of prior scientometric research of the knowledge management (KM) field.

A total of 108 scientometric studies of the KM discipline were subjected to meta-analysis techniques.

The overall volume of scientometric KM works has been growing, reaching up to ten publications per year by 2012, but their key findings are somewhat inconsistent. Most scientometric KM research is published in non-KM-centric journals. The KM discipline has deep historical roots. It suffers from a high degree of over-differentiation and is represented by dissimilar research streams. The top six most productive countries for KM research are the USA, the UK, Canada, Germany, Australia, and Spain. KM exhibits attributes of a healthy academic domain with no apparent anomalies and is progressing towards academic maturity.

Scientometric KM researchers should use advanced empirical methods, become aware of prior scientometric research, rely on multiple databases, develop a KM keyword classification scheme, publish their research in KM-centric outlets, focus on rigorous research of the forums for KM publications, improve their cooperation, conduct a comprehensive study of individual and institutional productivity, and investigate interdisciplinary collaboration. KM-centric journals should encourage authors to employ under-represented empirical methods and conduct meta-analysis studies and should discourage conceptual publications, especially the development of new frameworks. To improve the impact of KM research on the state of practice, knowledge dissemination channels should be developed.

This is the first documented attempt to conduct a meta-analysis of scientometric research of the KM discipline.

Following the recent rise in generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, fundamental questions about their wider impacts have started to reverberate around various disciplines. This study aims to track the unfolding landscape of general issues surrounding GenAI tools and to elucidate the specific opportunities and limitations of these tools as part of the technology-assisted enhancement of mechanical engineering education and professional practices.

As part of the investigation, the authors conduct and present a brief scientometric analysis of recently published studies to unravel the emerging trend on the subject matter. Furthermore, experimentation was done with selected GenAI tools (Bard, ChatGPT, DALL.E and 3DGPT) for mechanical engineering-related tasks.

The study identified several pedagogical and professional opportunities and guidelines for deploying GenAI tools in mechanical engineering. Besides, the study highlights some pitfalls of GenAI tools for analytical reasoning tasks (e.g., subtle errors in computation involving unit conversions) and sketching/image generation tasks (e.g., poor demonstration of symmetry).

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study presents the first thorough assessment of the potential of GenAI from the lens of the mechanical engineering field. Combining scientometric analysis, experimentation and pedagogical insights, the study provides a unique focus on the implications of GenAI tools for material selection/discovery in product design, manufacturing troubleshooting, technical documentation and product positioning, among others.

The construction business is widely recognised for its inherent complexity and dynamic nature, which stems from the nature of the job involved. The industry is often regarded as one of the most challenging industries globally in terms of implementing environmental, health and safety (EHS) practices. However, in the absence of EHS, the construction industry cannot be considered sustainable. Therefore, this study aims to identify the trends, knowledge gaps and implications of EHS research to enhance construction activities and knowledge.

The study adopted a science mapping approach involving bibliometric and scientometric analysis of 407 construction EHS publications from the Scopus database with the VOSviewer software. The study is based on journal articles from the Scopus database without restriction to any time range.

The main focus of construction EHS research identified in the study includes sustainability-related studies, risk-related, environmental issues, EHS management, integrated management systems studies, health and safety related and EHS in the construction process. Some emerging areas also identified include productivity, design, culture, social sustainability and machine learning. The most influential and productive publication sources, countries/regions and EHS publications with the highest impact were also determined.

Documents published in the Scopus database were considered for analysis because of the wider coverage of the database. Journal articles written in English language represent the inclusion criteria, whereas other documents were excluded from the analysis. The study also limited the search to articles with the engineering subject area.

The research findings will enlighten stakeholders and practitioners on the focal knowledge areas in the EHS research domain, which are vital for enhancing EHS in the industry.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this review-based study is the first attempt to internationally conduct a science mapping on extant literature in the EHS research domain through bibliometric and scientometric assessments.