The boundary-spanning mechanisms of Nobel Prize winning papers

A decennial study of the trend of antibiotic studies in China

Antibiotics are one of the greatest inventions in human history and are used worldwide on an enormous scale. Besides its extensive usage in medical and veterinary arenas to treat and prevent the infection, its application is very prominent in other fields, including agriculture, aquaculture, and horticulture. In recent decades, the increased consumption of antibiotics in China saw a vast increase in its production and disposal in various environments. However, in this post-antibiotic era, the abuse and misuse of these valuable compounds could lead to the unreversible consequence of drug resistance. In China, antibiotics are given a broad discussion in various fields to reveal their impact on both human/animals health and the environment. To our knowledge, we are the first paper to look back at the development trend of antibiotic-related studies in China with qualitative and quantitative bibliometric analysis from the past decades. Our study identified and analyzed 5559 papers from its inception (1991) to December 6, 2021, from the Web of Science Core Collection database. However, with few authors and institutions focusing on long-term studies, we found the quality of contributions was uneven. Studies mainly focused on areas such as food science, clinical research, and environmental studies, including molecular biology, genetics and environmental, ecotoxicology, and nutrition, which indicate possible primary future trends. Our study reports on including potentially new keywords, studies' milestones, and their contribution to antibiotic research. We offer potential topics that may be important in upcoming years that could help guide future research.

Insights into research on myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury from 2012 to 2021: a bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies on myocardial ischemia/reperfusion (MI/R) injury have been undertaken in recent years. Hotspots and developmental trends in MI/R research are being rapidly updated. However, there has been no bibliometric analysis that systematically evaluates existing literature on MI/R injury. Our study explores developments in MI/R research over the past decade, and provides a reference for future research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Both experimental and clinical publications on MI/R injury from 2012 to 2021 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. The CiteSpace and VOSviewer tools were used to perform a bibliometric analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 8419 papers were analyzed. The number of annual publications demonstrated an overall upward trend, rising from 629 publications in 2012 to 1024 publications in 2021. China, the USA, Germany, England, and Italy were the top five contributors to MI/R studies. The Fourth Military Medical University in China contributed the most publications (188, 2.23%), while the University College London in England cooperated the most with relevant research institutions. Derek J Hausenloy (University College London), Derek M Yellon (University College London), and Gerd Heusch (University of Essen Medical School) were the top three most active and influential scholars according to the H-index. Among the top 10 journals with the most publications, Basic Research in Cardiology had the highest impact factors. The top three co-cited journals were Circulation, Circulation Research, and Cardiovascular Research. According to a co-cited reference analysis, MI/R research can be divided across 10 major subfields of mitophagy, cardioprotection, inflammation, remote ischemic preconditioning, long non-coding RNA, melatonin, postconditioning, mitochondria, microvascular obstruction, and ferroptosis. After 2018, the keywords with strongest citation bursts included extracellular vesicles, long non-coding RNA, cell proliferation, microRNA, mitochondrial quality control, mitophagy, biomarker, and mitochondrial biogenesis.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study reveals the influential authors, cooperating institutions, and main research foci in the field of MI/R injury in the past decade. The latest hotspots are a more in-depth insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying MI/R injury, such as mitochondrial quality control, non-coding RNAs, cell proliferation, and extracellular vesicles.

Winners and runners-up alike?-a comparison between awardees and special mention recipients of the most reputable science award in Colombia via a composite citation indicator

The research agenda on global academic elites (e.g., those awarded the Nobel Prize) has overlooked academic awards and elites from developing countries and the public symbolic recognition of scientific elites by research awards. In this study, we examine the bibliometric features of individual researcher profiles of those participants who received a special mention in Colombia's most prestigious prize in the sciences: the Alejandro Ángel Escobar Prize (AAEP). First, we chart the citation per article trend of Colombia's most prolific researchers before and after receiving the special mention and the AAEP. We then compare the special mention group with those awarded the AAEP, using a composite citation indicator of six scientific impact and productivity indices to estimate (1) bulk impact (number of citations and h index) and (2) authorship order adjusted impact (Schreiber hm index; total citations for articles of which the scientist is the single author; total citations for articles of which the scientist is the single or first author; and total citations for articles of which the scientist is the single, first, or last author). Results show that there is no overall halo effect in citation per article after receiving the special mention or the AAEP. Such recognition comes after an academically productive career marked by multiple citations per article peaks. There is no clear-cut division between the composite citation indicator of those awarded a special mention and those awarded the AAEP. Findings place the profile of local authors in an adjusted and inclusive framework that takes full cognisance of the scientific elites in developing countries.

The Colombian scientific elite-Science mapping and a comparison with Nobel Prize laureates using a composite citation indicator

A well-established agenda on the research output, impact, and structure of global scientific elites such as Nobel Prize laureates has generated interest in the scientific elites from developing countries. However, this topic has not been investigated in detail. This study, first, deploys science mapping techniques to provide a comprehensive analysis of the output, impact, and structure of the Colombian scientific elite, i.e., researchers awarded with the Alejandro Ángel Escobar Foundation National Prize 1990-2020, known locally as the Colombian Nobel. Second, we conducted a productivity and impact comparison between the Colombian scientific elite and Nobel Prize laureates in science and economics by means of a stratified random sample 1990-2020 via the composite citation indicator proposed by Ioannidis et al. Findings showed that the Colombian scientific elite has a broader agenda than indexing titles in internationally renowned bibliographic databases. The Colombian scientific elite also showed positive growth, which is an inverse trend compared with the sample of Nobel laureate productivity. There were no noticeable changes in productivity/impact before and after receiving the Alejandro Ángel Escobar Foundation National Prize. Institutional collaboration within the Colombian scientific elite displayed the highest betweenness (brokerage) role of world/local top-tier universities. However, only two Colombian scientific elite members published an article with two Nobel Prize laureates. Most of the research profiles reflected the national output priorities, but were found to diverge from the national focus in respect of strategic research capacities. The interleaving of the Colombian scientific elite and Nobel Prize laureates-particularly between the 3rd and 2nd quartiles-enabled a more nuanced analysis of the local impact in the global scientific landscape. Our findings also contrast with previous findings on the lower research impact of authors from Latin America, despite their involvement as contributors to reputable journals, and also shed light on the research performance-impact standards and agenda between the global North and South and provide an in-context assessment of outstanding local research.