IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v94y2013i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0699-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective

Author

Listed:
  • R. S. Bajwa

    (Preston Institute of Nanoscience and Technology (PINSAT))

  • K. Yaldram

    (Preston Institute of Nanoscience and Technology (PINSAT))

  • S. Rafique

    (King Abdulaziz University)

Abstract

In this study we present an analysis of the research trends in Pakistan in the field of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Starting with just seven publications in the year 2000, this number has steadily increased to 542 for the year 2011. Among the top 15 institutions with publications in nanotechnology 13 are universities and only two are R&D organizations. Almost 35 % of the research publications are in the field of material sciences followed by chemistry and physics in that order. The growth in the publications for period 2000–2011 is studied through relative growth rate and doubling time. The authorship pattern is measured by different collaboration parameters, like collaborative index, degree of collaboration, collaboration coefficient and modified collaboration coefficient. Finally the quality of papers is assessed by means of the h-index, g-index, hg-index and p-index.

Suggested Citation

  • R. S. Bajwa & K. Yaldram & S. Rafique, 2013. "A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 333-342, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0699-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0699-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0699-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-012-0699-4?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. Leo Egghe, 2006. "Theory and practise of the g-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 131-152, October.
    2. Kiran Savanur & R. Srikanth, 2010. "Modified collaborative coefficient: a new measure for quantifying the degree of research collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 365-371, August.
    3. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    4. Gangan Prathap, 2010. "The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 167-172, July.
    5. S. Alonso & F. J. Cabrerizo & E. Herrera-Viedma & F. Herrera, 2010. "hg-index: a new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g-indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 391-400, February.
    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. Jiancheng Guan & He Wei, 2015. "A bilateral comparison of research performance at an institutional level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 147-173, July.
    2. Shao-jie Zhang & Peng-hui Lyu & Yan Yan, 2015. "Global geographical and scientometric analysis of tourism-themed research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 385-401, October.
    3. Yue Hu & Jun Sun & Weimin Li & Yunlong Pan, 2014. "A scientometric study of global electric vehicle research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1269-1282, February.
    4. Jiang Tan & Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "A bibliometric analysis of research on proteomics in Science Citation Index Expanded," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1473-1490, February.
    5. Nicholas V. Olijnyk, 2015. "A quantitative examination of the intellectual profile and evolution of information security from 1965 to 2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 883-904, November.
    6. Cristiane B. D. Matielo & Deise S. Sarzi & Beatriz Justolin & Rafael P. M. Lemos & Flavio A. O. Camargo & Valdir M. Stefenon, 2018. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Cannabis Publications: Six Decades of Research and a Gap on Studies with the Plant," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-11, September.
    7. Juliana A. Ivar do Sul & Alexander S. Tagg & Matthias Labrenz, 2018. "Exploring the common denominator between microplastics and microbiology: a scientometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2145-2157, December.
    8. T. Gorjiara & C. Baldock, 2014. "Nanoscience and nanotechnology research publications: a comparison between Australia and the rest of the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(1), pages 121-148, July.
    9. Saad Ahmed Javed & Sifeng Liu, 2018. "Predicting the research output/growth of selected countries: application of Even GM (1, 1) and NDGM models," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 395-413, April.
    10. Elena M. Tur & Evangelos Bourelos & Maureen McKelvey, 2022. "The case of sleeping beauties in nanotechnology: a study of potential breakthrough inventions in emerging technologies," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 683-708, December.

    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. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    2. Vivek Kumar Singh & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Ashraf Uddin, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of research on ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 727-741, November.
    3. Wei, Shelia X. & Tong, Tong & Rousseau, Ronald & Wang, Wanru & Ye, Fred Y., 2022. "Relations among the h-, g-, ψ-, and p-index and offset-ability," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    4. R. S. Bajwa & K. Yaldram, 2013. "Bibliometric analysis of biotechnology research in Pakistan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 529-540, May.
    5. Abdulrahman A. Alshdadi & Muhammad Usman & Madini O. Alassafi & Muhammad Tanvir Afzal & Rayed AlGhamdi, 2023. "Formulation of rules for the scientific community using deep learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1825-1852, March.
    6. Vîiu, Gabriel-Alexandru, 2016. "A theoretical evaluation of Hirsch-type bibliometric indicators confronted with extreme self-citation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 552-566.
    7. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    8. Shahryar Rahnamayan & Sedigheh Mahdavi & Kalyanmoy Deb & Azam Asilian Bidgoli, 2020. "Ranking Multi-Metric Scientific Achievements Using a Concept of Pareto Optimality," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-46, June.
    9. Georgios Stoupas & Antonis Sidiropoulos & Antonia Gogoglou & Dimitrios Katsaros & Yannis Manolopoulos, 2018. "Rainbow ranking: an adaptable, multidimensional ranking method for publication sets," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 147-160, July.
    10. Parul Khurana & Kiran Sharma, 2022. "Impact of h-index on author’s rankings: an improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4483-4498, August.
    11. Balatsky, E. & Yurevich, M., 2016. "The Misalignment of Russian Economists' Scientometric Indicators in RISC," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 176-180.
    12. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "Criticism on the hg-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 339-346, February.
    13. Yu Liu & Wei Zuo & Ying Gao & Yanhong Qiao, 2013. "Comprehensive geometrical interpretation of h-type indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 605-615, August.
    14. Roberto Todeschini, 2011. "The j-index: a new bibliometric index and multivariate comparisons between other common indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 621-639, June.
    15. Domingo Docampo & Jean-Jacques Bessoule, 2019. "A new approach to the analysis and evaluation of the research output of countries and institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1207-1225, May.
    16. Kuan, Chung-Huei & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2011. "Ranking patent assignee performance by h-index and shape descriptors," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 303-312.
    17. Giovanni Anania & Annarosa Caruso, 2013. "Two simple new bibliometric indexes to better evaluate research in disciplines where publications typically receive less citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 617-631, August.
    18. Muhammad Usman & Ghulam Mustafa & Muhammad Tanvir Afzal, 2021. "Ranking of author assessment parameters using Logistic Regression," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 335-353, January.
    19. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2010. "The citation triad: An overview of a scientist's publication output based on Ferrers diagrams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 503-511.
    20. Bornmann, Lutz & Mutz, Rüdiger & Hug, Sven E. & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2011. "A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 346-359.

    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:94:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0699-4. 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.