Search results

The present study aims to overview Brazilian human resources and scientific output in astronomy, immunology and oceanography during the last decade.

Data on human resources and on scientific output were obtained from the Brazilian database, the Directory of Research Groups. Scientific outputs were also analysed from a set of journals catalogued by the Institute for Scientific Information: the 20 journals with the largest number of articles in 2003.

Compared with the other two fields, the number of Brazilian researchers in astronomy has not grown from 1997‐2002, but they are the most qualified and more than 90 per cent of them have a PhD degree. Most astronomy publications are in international journals and they are well cited. The most cited astronomy papers are on international topics, but this is not true for the oceanography papers.

These data are derived from a particular set of publications and should be interpreted as trends rather than as definitive.

This study, which covers three fields with different structures and traditions, provides a snapshot of some features of the whole of Brazilian science, and will provide evidence for new science policies.

To provide an empirical contribution to analyse the dynamics of research groups in knowledge production in an interdisciplinary research field in two scientifically peripheral countries (Colombia and Brazil).

This dynamic is analysed in the interdisciplinary area of immunology through a comparative study of Brazilian and Colombian research groups. The practices of publication, collaborative links and patterns of acknowledgements provided the framework for this study. Quantitative and qualitative tools were used; in particular a bibliometric study was complemented with information derived from semi‐structured interviews with members of the research communities selected.

The bibliometric study allowed the construction of some indicators: channels of publication, impact of the research outputs, citations and patterns of collaboration. Also, a database with acknowledgements was created to identify the different actors who take part in the process of knowledge production. These indicators, interpreted in the light of qualitative analysis, throw considerable light on how the different groups work on the cognitive and social aspects of knowledge production.

This study is limited to 31 leading research groups from Colombia and Brazil.

This paper starts to redress the situation of a lack of empirical studies in developing countries in the use of acknowledgements as a tool to examine formal and informal scientific collaboration and as indicator of accountability to funding bodies. This work provides an empirical contribution to policy‐makers and scientific communities in the task of understanding the dynamics of knowledge production in an interdisciplinary area combining different approaches.

The academic community has warned that predatory journals may attempt to capitalize on the confusion caused by the COVID-19 pandemic to further publish low quality academic work, eroding the credibility of scholarly publishing.

This article first chronicles the risks of predatory publishing, especially related to misinformation surrounding health research. Next, the author offers an empirical investigation of how predatory publishing has engaged with COVID-19, with an emphasis on journals related to virology, immunology and epidemiology as identified through Cabells' Predatory Reports, through a content analysis of publishers' websites and a comparison to a sample from DOAJ.

The empirical findings show that there were 162 titles related to these critical areas from journals listed on Cabells with a range of infractions, but most were defunct and only 39 had published on the pandemic. Compared to a DOAJ comparison group, the predatory journal websites were less likely to mention slowdowns to the peer review process related to the pandemic. Furthermore, another 284 predatory journals with COVID-19 engagement were uncovered from the initial exploration. These uncovered journals mostly centered on medical or biological science fields, while 42 titles came from other broader fields in social science, other STEM or humanities.

This study does not prove that predatory publications have released misinformation pertaining to COVID-19, but rather it exemplifies the potential within a complex academic publishing space. As these outlets have proven to be vectors of misleading science, libraries and the broader educational community need to stay vigilant as information intermediaries of online research.

In two case studies of research units, reference values used to benchmark research performance appeared to show contradictory results: the average citation level in the subfields (FCSm) increased world‐wide, while the citation level of the journals (JCSm) decreased, where concomitant changes were expected. Explanations were sought in: a shift in preference of document types; a change in publication preference for subfields; and changes in journal coverage. Publishing in newly covered journals with a low impact had a negative effect on impact ratios. However, the main factor behind the increase in FCSm was the distribution of articles across the five‐year block periods that were studied. Publication in lower impact journals produced a lagging JCSm. Actual values of JCSm, FCSm, and citations per publication (CPP) values are not very informative either about research performance, or about the development of impact over time in a certain subfield with block indicators. Normalized citation impact indicators are free from such effects and should be consulted primarily in research performance assessments.

We are in the midst of a refugee crisis, and the ways in which we approach the issue of unprecedented numbers of people crossing borders will shape our world for generations to come. In this chapter, we problematize immunology, capitalism and other lenses through which we construct, label and categorize others and how such constructions and categorizations manifest in educational spheres for migrants, immigrants, refugees and host country nationals. As with access to education, the resources one has also determine one’s ability to migrate and the conditions of one’s resettlement. Therefore, we discuss the ways in which globalization provides greater mobility for those with substantial wealth and how conditions with/in post-modernism serve to create borders between people, their wealth and the social contexts in which they and their wealth reside. We create boxes as labels into which we slot people all too easily. While we critique the discourses and systems that create the socio-political milieu of education for immigrants, migrants and refugees in the US, we also highlight issues abroad, including how language is weaponized in the framing of immigration and those who emigrate.

The purpose of this study is to determine the funding ratio of BRICS nations in various research areas. The leading funding institutions that support research in the developing world have also been researched.

This study involves the funding acknowledgment analysis of the data retrieved from the “Clarivate Analytics' InCites database” under “22 specific research areas” to determine whether the publication was funded.

This study shows that China achieves the highest funding ratio of 88.6%, followed by Brazil (73.74%), Russia (72.93%) and South Africa (70.94%). However, India has the lowest funding ratio of 58.2%. For the subject areas, the highest funding ratio is by microbiology in Russia (86.6%), India (84.3%) and China (96.9%) and space science in Brazil (93.7%) and South Africa (94.82%). However, economics and business achieves the lowest funding ratio in Brazil (38.6%), India (20.1%) and South Africa (30.24%). Moreover, the regional funding agencies are the leading research sponsors in the BRICS nations.

This study implies increasing the funding ratio across various research areas, including arts, humanities and social sciences. The nations, particularly India, also need to gear up sponsoring the research to improve the funding ratio for scientific development, bringing overall good.

This study efforts to show the status of countries and research subjects in terms of funding ratio and reveals the prominent funders working toward scientific growth.

The advent of space travel and long‐term space dwelling has precipitated the need for the development of Space Exercise Science. Because of the uniqueness of weightlessness conditions, microgravities, and isolation in space – special considerations for career planning in space exercise science must be initiated. The current trends, by many countries, to establish long‐term space ventures, by many countries, gives impetus to develop various new areas of study in space exercise science. The career implications for future exercise space‐scientists are many, including space nutrition, robotics, and exercise prescription and space cell physiology. Current Earth studies concerning radiation, immunology, and stress are linked with future space endeavours. Seeks to give an overview of current happenings in space physiology; and how these conditions transpose to create a new field for career planning in Space Exercise Science.

Despite significant progress in Iran's immunization programs, vaccine policymaking in the country still faces various challenges and shortcomings. To address these issues and ensure sustained progress toward achieving comprehensive vaccination policies, it is essential to identify the critical factors influencing vaccine policies in Iran. Our study aims to provide evidence-based insights that can inform the development of effective and equitable vaccine strategies, leading to a more sustainable and efficient approach to vaccination in the country.

This mixed-method study aimed to analyze the factors influencing the future of human vaccine policy using Cross Impact Analysis. Firstly, a scoping review was conducted to identify the factors affecting the future of human vaccine development. Secondly, a semi-structured interview was conducted with experts in this field to add more factors and confirm the identified factors within the Iranian context. Finally, a Cross-Impact Analysis (CIA) approach was applied to comprehend the complex relationships between the identified factors. Thematic analysis was used for the qualitative data, and MICMAC analysis was applied to characterize the relationships between the factors.

Seventeen key driving force factors were identified through comprehensive review and interviews. These factors were assigned weighted values ranging from zero to three and subsequently analyzed using MICMAC software. Employing the Cross-Impact Analysis (CIA) technique, the study characterized the impact of each factor on vaccine policy and elucidated the intricate interactions between them. The findings underscored that robust leadership and governance, an innovative ecosystem, and well-established immunization information systems emerged as pivotal driving forces shaping vaccine policy in Iran.

While this study contributes valuable insights into the driving factors influencing vaccine policy in Iran, it is important to acknowledge several limitations. The results rely on the subjective perceptions of a diverse group of specialists, and future research could delve into additional factors in other countries to identify common themes and differences.

This study provides evidence to assist policymakers in making informed decisions regarding vaccines in Iran. The findings suggest that enhancing access to vaccines, fostering trust in the healthcare system, and prioritizing equity in distribution can contribute to increased vaccination rates and a reduction in vaccine-preventable diseases.

This study provides a unique contribution to the field of vaccine policy by utilizing the cross-impact analysis to examine the complex interactions among various factors. The results of this analysis demonstrate that these interactions can significantly impact the overall system, highlighting the need for policymakers to consider multiple factors when formulating effective strategies. By revealing the significance of these interactions, this research offers valuable insights into the development of successful policies that can shape a desirable future for vaccine policy in Iran. Future studies could ratify the findings from this research by applying other methodological approaches.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the hypothesis that collaboration was a key characteristic of Cuban science to maintain their scientific capacity during a period of economic restrictions and an important feature of Cuban science policy and practice for the benefit of society.

Collaboration was studied through Cuban scientific publications listed in PubMed for the period 1990-2010. The search was carried out using the advanced search engine of PubMed indicating < Cuba > in the affiliation field. To identify participating institutions a second search was performed to find the affiliations of all authors per article through the link to the electronic journal. A data set was created to identify institutional publication patterns for the surveyed period. Institutions were classified in three categories according to their scientific production as Central, Middle or Distal: the pattern of collaboration between these categories was analysed.

Results indicate that collaboration between scientifically advanced institutions (Central) and a wide range of national institutions is a consequence of the social character of science in Cuba in which cooperation prevails. Although this finding comes from a limited field of biomedical science it is likely to reflect Cuban science policy in general.

Using bibliometric tools the study suggests that Cuban science policy and practice ensure the application of science for social needs by harnessing human resources through national and international collaboration, building in this way stronger scientific capacity.

There is a general notion that immunology represents one of the more recently emerged branches in the field of science. Its actual roots, however, go back to the late 19th century when scientists like Louis Pasteur, Robert Koch and Paul Ehrlich — just to name a few — laid the basis for active immunisation against bacterial infections. Following the discovery of the virus and its structure, immunisation against viral infections was developed, the most spectacular and effective treatments being vaccinations against smallpox and poliomyelitis.