Journal of Information Management (정보관리연구)

Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (한국과학기술정보연구원 과학기술정보센터)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

National Patterns of Research output and Priorities in Hepatitis: a Scientometric Analysis

간염에 대한 국가별 연구패턴과 우선순위의 계량과학적 분석

  • Published : 2008.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper presents a scientometric analysis of national patterns of research output and priorities in the sub-fields of Hepatitis covered in three bibliographic databases namely MEDLINE, CINAHL and IPA. The literature covered in three databases for the period 1984-2003 was considered. We have already discussed the Trends in the Growth of Literature on Hepatitis in our previous paper. Therefore in this paper only sub-fields analysis is presented. It has been found that the Hepatitis literature output has been grouped in 23 major sub-fields based on databases covered. It was found that there were high priorities for some of the sub-fields of Hepatitis research during 1984-1993. It was found that the research priority profile was more or less homogenous since majority of the sub-fields are showing either below or above average levels of priority profile. In the first phase of the research period covering from 1984-1993, there are high priorities in 10 sub-fields in USA followed by 9 in UK and 8 in Germany, 7 each in Canada, Russia and Netherlands. On the other hand, in the second phase (1994-2003) there are high priorities for 10 sub-fields in Germany, 9 in UK, 8 in USA, 7 each in Canada, Russia and Netherlands. In the productivity of Pediatrics sub-field, India is in the third position.

이 연구에서는 MEDLINE과 CINAHL, IPA 등 3개 서지데이터베이스에 수록된 1984년부터 2003년까지 20년간의 문헌을 바탕으로 간염의 하위영역의 국가별 연구패턴과 우선순위에 대한 계량과학적 분석을 시도하였다. 이 연구에서는 연구자들의 간염연구분야의 전반적인 문헌분석에 대한 선행연구를 바탕으로 특히 하위영역에 대한 계량과학적 분석을 시도하였다. 간염분야의 주요 하위영역의 문헌은 23개로 세분되고 있으며, 1984-1993년의 기간중에는 일부 하위영역이 높은 우선순위를 차지하고 있었다. 하위영역의 우선순위가 높은 국가를 분석기간의 전반기와 후반기로 비교해 보면, 전반기(1984-1993)에는 미국(10개하위영역), 영국(9), 독일(8), 캐나다, 러시아, 네덜란드(각각 7) 순이었고, 후반기 (1994-2003)에는 독일(10), 영국(9), 미국(8), 캐나다, 러시아, 네덜란드(각각 7) 순이었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Aldenderfer, Marks and Blastifield, Roger K. 1984. Cluster Analysis. London: Sage Publication.
  2. Barre, R. 1991. “Clustering research fields for macro-strategic analysis: a comparative specialization approach.” Scientometrics, 22(1): 95‐112.
  3. Barre, R.A. 1987. “A strategic assesment of scientific performance of five countries.” Science and Technology Studies, 5: 32-38.
  4. Bordons, Maria and Barrigon, S. 1992. “Bibliometric analysis of publications of Spanish pharmacologists in the SCI (1984‐1989). Part II,” Scientometrics, 25(3): 425-446. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016930
  5. Carpenter, M.P., Gibbs. F., Harris, M., Irvine, J. and Narin, P. 1988. “Bibliometric profiles of academic institutions: An experiment to develop output indicators.” Scientometrics, 16: 213-233.
  6. Ding, Ying, Chowdhury, Gobinda G and Foo, Schubert. 1999. Mapping the Development in Information Retrieval Specialty: A Bibliometric Analysis via Journals. In: International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics Proceedings, Colima, Mexico, 139-149.
  7. Frame, J.D. 1977. “Mainstream research in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Intersciencia, 2: 143-148.
  8. Johnson, Richard. A. and Whichern, Dean W. 1996. Applied Multivariate analysis. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India, 575.
  9. Karki, M.M.S. 1990. “Environmental Science Research in India: an analysis of publications.” Scientometrics, 18(5-6): 363-373. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02020151
  10. Karki, M.M.S., Garg, K.C. and Sharma, P. 2000. “Activity and Growth of Organic Chemistry Research in India During 1971-1989.” Scientometrics, 49: 279-88. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010521203335
  11. Nagpaul, P.S. 2000. National Patterns of Research output and Priorities in Physics: a bibliometric analysis, In: P.S. Nagpaul, K.C.Garg and B.M. Gupta(ed), Emerging Trends in Scientometrics, New Delhi: Allied: 81-110.
  12. Nagpaul. P.S. 2000. National Patterns of Research output and Priorities in Physics: a bibliometric analysis, Emerging Trends in Scientometrics, New Delhi: Allied: 81-110.
  13. Parameswaran, R. 2002. Bibliometric Analysis of Air Pollution Research using 'E‐CD'. Thesis submitted to the University of Madras for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by R. Parameswaran, April 2002. (Unpublished).
  14. Rajendiran, P. 2006. Scientometric Analysis of literature on Fiber Optics: A study based on bibliographic Databases. Thesis submitted to the University of Madras for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by P. Rajendiran, December 2006. (Unpublished).
  15. Ramakrishnan, J 2006. Scientometric Analysis of Literature on Hepatitis: A Study Based on Bibliographic Databases. Chennai: University of Madras (Supervisor: Prof. B. Ramesh Babu).
  16. Ramesh Babu, B and Ramakrishnan, J 2007. Scientometric Analysis of Literature on Hepatitis: A Study Based on Bibliographic Databases. Chennai: University of Madras (Supervisor: Prof. B. Ramesh Babu). 31-50.
  17. Ramesh Babu, B and Ramakrishnan, J 2007. “Trends in the Growth of Literature on Hepatitis (1984-2003),” Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 38 (2): 31-50. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.38.2.200706.31
  18. Schubert, A. and Braun, T. 1986. “Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact.” Scientometrics, 14(2): 142-153.
  19. Sudhir, K.S. 1997. Contribution of Kerala to Indian Science: A Bibliometric Analsysis. In : G. Devarajan (ed), Bibliometric Studies. New Delhi: ESS ESS Publications, 81-97. .
  20. Todorov, R. 1989. “Representing a scientific field: a bibliometric approach.” Scientometrics, 15(5-6): 593-605. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017072
  21. Turkington (Carlol) Hepatitis C: the silent Killer. 1998. Contemporary Books: Lincolnwood (Chicago).
  22. CINAHL. .
  23. IPA. .
  24. MEDLINE. .