Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
Journals
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Dwivedi, Sandhya
- Scientometric Profile of Global Male Breast Cancer Research
Abstract Views :195 |
PDF Views:23
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Library and Information Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, IN
2 CSIR-National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies, Dr K.S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi 110 012, IN
1 Department of Library and Information Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, IN
2 CSIR-National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies, Dr K.S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi 110 012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 112, No 09 (2017), Pagination: 1814-1821Abstract
An analysis of 4165 papers published during 2005-2014 on male breast cancer and indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded indicates that the publication output in this nascent field is increasing steadily. The output is scattered among 91 countries, and USA ranks first in the publication output as well as impact in terms of citations per paper (CPP) and relative citation impact (RCI). The global compound annual growth rate during the period of study is 6.2. Change in transformative activity index is highest for the People's Republic of China (PRC). However, impact of research output is low for PRC. The research output is highly scattered in terms of prolific institutions, authors and journals publishing research results. Most of the prolific institutions are located in USA. Among the prolific institutions, the highest value of CPP and RCI was for Massachusetts General Hospital (USA), and among authors the highest value of CPP and RCI was for Thompson D. from the University of Cambridge (England).Keywords
Citation Analysis, Male Breast Cancer, Publication Output, Scientometric Assessment, Transformative Activity Index.Full Text
References
- Sasco, A. J., Lowenfels, A. B. and Pasker-de Jong, P., Epidemiology of male breast cancer. A meta-analysis of published case control studies and discussion of selected aetiological factors. Int. J. Cancer, 1993, 53, 538–549.
- Young, I. E. et al., The CAG repeat within the androgen receptor gene in male breast cancer patients. J. Med. Genet., 2000, 37, 139–140.
- William, B. G. et al., Experiences of men with breast cancer: an explanatory focus group study. Br. J. Cancer, 2003, 89, 1834–1836.
- Giordano, S. H. et al., Breast carcinoma in men: a population based study. Cancer, 2004, 101, 51–57; doi:10.1002/cncr.20312.
- France, L. et al., Male cancer: a qualitative study of male breast cancer. Breast J., 2000, 9, 343–348.
- Moodley, J. et al., A bibliometric analysis of cancer research in South Africa: study protocol. BMJ Open, 2015, 5, e006913; doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006913.
- Biglu, M. H., Breast cancer in Iran: the trend of Iranian researchers’ studies in medline database. Basic Clin. Cancer Res., 2014, 6(1), 22–32.
- Perez-Santos, J. L. M. and Anaya-Ruiz, M., Mexican breast research output, 2003–2012. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev., 2013, 14, 5921–5923.
- Nazir, T., Samriya, S. and Debba, F., Scientometric study of BRCA (breast cancer) research: an assessment of publication and country share, growth rate and h-index. Res. Rev.: J. Oncol. Haematol., 2015, 4, 5–17.
- Glynn, R. W., Schutaru, C., Karin, J. M. and Sweeney, J. K., Breast cancer research output, 1945–2008: a bibliometric and density equalizing analysis. Breast Cancer Res., 2010, 12, R108; doi:10.1186/bcr2795.
- Guan, J. and Ma, N., A comparative study of research performance in computer science. Scientometrics, 2004, 61(3), 339–359.
- Karki, M. M. S. and Garg, K. C., Bibliometrics of alkaloid chemistry research in India. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1997, 37, 157–161.
- Kumar, S. and Garg, K. C., Scientometrics of computer science research in India and China. Scientometrics, 2005, 64, 121–132.
- Dwivedi, S., Kumar, S. and Garg, K. C., Scientometric profile of organic chemistry research in India during 2004–2013. Curr. Sci., 2015, 109, 869–877.
- Garg, K. C., Kumar, S., Madhavi, Y. and Bahl, M., Bibliometrics of global malaria vaccine research. Health Inf. Lib. J., 2009, 26, 22–31.
- Dutt, B., Kumar, S. and Garg, K. C., Scientometric profile of global dengue research, COLLNET. J. Scientometrics Inf. Manage., 2010, 4, 81–91.
- Response
Abstract Views :170 |
PDF Views:19
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Library and Information Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, IN
1 Department of Library and Information Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 114, No 11 (2018), Pagination: 2223-2223Abstract
We thank Elango for meticulously going through our article and pointing out some mistakes. Here are the responses to the queries raised by him.Full Text
References
- Dwivedi, S., Garg, K. C. and Prasad, H. N., Curr. Sci., 2017, 112(9), 1814–1821.
- Glynn, R. W. et al., Breast Cancer Res., 2010, 12, R108.
- Collaboration Pattern in Male Breast Cancer Research
Abstract Views :177 |
PDF Views:19
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Library & Information Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221005, IN
2 CSIR-National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies, Dr. K.S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi - 110012, IN
1 Department of Library & Information Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221005, IN
2 CSIR-National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies, Dr. K.S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi - 110012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 115, No 5 (2018), Pagination: 845-850Abstract
An analysis of 4168 research papers on male breast cancer (MBC) published by different countries and indexed by Science Citation Index Expanded during 2005–2014 indicates that only 15% of the papers were non-collaborative and the rest were published either in domestic or international collaboration. The sub-field of MBC had a high proportion of domestic collaboration. The number of papers written with domestic collaboration was almost three times the number of papers written with international collaboration. The value of co-authorship index (CAI) decreased in single-, twoand multi-authored papers in the second block 2010–2014 as compared to the first block (2005– 2009). Higher value of CAI for mega-authored papers reflects higher collaborative coefficient (CC) in 2010–2014. The highest value of CC is for the sub-field S9 (genetics and heredity). This is also indicated by the highest value of CAI for mega-authored papers in this subfield. Among 17 highly productive institutions, CC value is more or equal to the global value of CC for 10 prolific institutions.Keywords
International Collaboration, Male Breast Cancer, Research Publications.Full Text
References
- Bozeman, B. and Boardman, C., Research collaboration and team science: a state of the art review and agenda. Assessing Research Collaboration Studies: A Framework for Analysis, Springer, London, Chap 1, 2014.
- Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F. and Uzzi, B., The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 2007, 316(5827), 1036–1039.
- Bennett, L. M. and Gadlin, H., Collaboration and team science: from theory to practice. J. Invest. Med., 2012, 60(5), 768–775; doi:10.231/JIM.0b013e318250871d.
- Adams, J., Collaborations: the fourth age of research. Nature, 2013, 497, 557–560; doi:10.1038/497557a.
- Glanzel, W., National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 2001, 51, 69–115.
- Wagner, C. S. and Leydesdorff, L., Mapping the network of global science: comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000. Int. J. Technol. Globalisation, 2005, 1(2), 185–208.
- Wagner, C. S., The New Invisible College, Brookings Press, Washington, DC, 2008.
- Persson, O., Glänzel, W. and Danell, R., Inflationary bibliometrics values: the role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 2004, 60(3), 421– 432.
- Low, W. Y., Ng, K. H., Kabir, M. A., Koh, A. P. and Sinnasamy, J., Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia. Scientometrics, 2014, 98(2), 1521–1533; doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-1121-6.
- Prakasan, E. R., Mohan, L., Girap, P., Surwase, G., Kademani, B. S. and Bhanumurthy, K., Scientometric facts on international collaborative Indian publications. Curr. Sci., 2014, 106(2), 166–169.
- Basu, A. and Kumar, B. S. V., International collaboration in Indian scientific papers. Scientometrics, 2000, 48(3), 381–402.
- Garg, K. C. and Dwivedi, S., Pattern of collaboration in the discipline of Japanese encephalitis. DESIDOC J. Lib. Infor. Technol., 2014, 34(3), 241–247.
- Gupta, B. M. and Karisiddappa, C. R., Collaboration in theoretical population genetics speciality. Scientometrics, 1998, 42(3), 349– 376.
- Garg, K. C. and Padhi, P., A study of collaboration in laser science and technology. Scientometrics, 2001, 51(2), 415–427.
- Shrivats, S. V. and Bhattacharya, S., Forecasting the trend of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 2014, 101, 1941–1954; doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1364-x.
- Dwivedi, S., Garg, K. C. and Prasad, H. N., Scientometric profile of global male breast cancer research. Curr. Sci., 2017, 112(9), 1814–1821.
- Ajiferuke, I., Burrel, Q. and Tague, J., Collaborative coefficient: a single measure of the degree of collaboration in research. Scientometrics, 1988, 14(5–6), 421–433.
- De Solla Price, D. and Beaver, D. B., Collaboration in an invisible college. Am. Psychol., 1966, 21(11), 1011–1018.
- De Solla Price, D., The analysis of scientometric metrics for policy implications. Scientometrics, 1981, 3(1), 47–54.
- Frame, J. D., Mainstream research in Latin America and Caribbean. Interciencia, 1977, 2(3), 143–148.
- Schubert, A. and Braun, T., Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 1986, 9(5–6), 281–291.
- Bordons, M., Gomez, I. and Teresa, F. M., Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics, 1996, 37(2), 279–295.