IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v52y2001i3d10.1023_a1014291715245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elite Researchers in Ophthalmology: Aspects of Publishing Strategies, Collaboration and Multi-Disciplinarity

Author

Listed:
  • Mari Davis

    (Technology and Management University of New South Wales)

  • Concepción S. Wilson

    (Technology and Management University of New South Wales)

Abstract

This study covers a ten-year period, 1990-1999, of the publishing careers of nine authors who appear in the top-20 most productive authors in the field of ophthalmology. In this paper we discuss findings from a study of the publishing careers of elite researchers in the field of ophthalmology. The paper highlights the extent and nature of the journals in which these elite researchers publish their work. Data derived from the study include indications of multidisciplinary involvement or 'work-space' interests, publication characteristics, and collaborative engagement with others. We provide insights into the workings of author productivity, characteristics of papers such as numbers per paper of pages, references, and authors, and initial findings about their collaboration patterns. These findings, showing (ir)regularities or patterns in publishing careers, may be of interest to researchers and practitioners because they provide a view that might not otherwise be apparent to the field or to authors themselves.

Suggested Citation

  • Mari Davis & Concepción S. Wilson, 2001. "Elite Researchers in Ophthalmology: Aspects of Publishing Strategies, Collaboration and Multi-Disciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(3), pages 395-410, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:52:y:2001:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1014291715245
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1014291715245
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1014291715245
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1014291715245?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Davis & C. S. Wilson & W. W. Hood, 1999. "Ophthalmology and optics: An informetric study of Australia's contribution to fields in the Vision Science domain, 1991–95," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 46(3), pages 399-416, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2011. "Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 145-161, July.
    2. Yu, Hairong & Davis, Mari & Wilson, Concepción S. & Cole, Fletcher T.H., 2008. "Object-relational data modelling for informetric databases," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 240-251.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Donatella Ugolini & Marco Amedeo Cimmino & Cristina Casilli & Giuseppe Sandro Mela, 2001. "How the European Union writes about ophthalmology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(1), pages 45-58, September.
    2. Feng Zou & Mingxing Wu & Kaili Wu, 2009. "Outcomes associated with ophthalmology, optometry and visual science literature in the Science Citation Index from mainland China, 2000–2007," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 671-682, December.
    3. K. C. Garg, 2003. "An overview of cross-national, national, and institutional assessment as reflected in the international journal Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 56(2), pages 169-199, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:52:y:2001:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1014291715245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.