Literature DB >> 14963238

Mapping knowledge domains: characterizing PNAS.

Kevin W Boyack1.   

Abstract

A review of data mining and analysis techniques that can be used for the mapping of knowledge domains is given. Literature mapping techniques can be based on authors, documents, journals, words, and/or indicators. Most mapping questions are related to research assessment or to the structure and dynamics of disciplines or networks. Several mapping techniques are demonstrated on a data set comprising 20 years of papers published in PNAS. Data from a variety of sources are merged to provide unique indicators of the domain bounded by PNAS. By using funding source information and citation counts, it is shown that, on an aggregate basis, papers funded jointly by the U.S. Public Health Service (which includes the National Institutes of Health) and non-U.S. government sources outperform papers funded by other sources, including by the U.S. Public Health Service alone. Grant data from the National Institute on Aging show that, on average, papers from large grants are cited more than those from small grants, with performance increasing with grant amount. A map of the highest performing papers over the 20-year period was generated by using citation analysis. Changes and trends in the subjects of highest impact within the PNAS domain are described. Interactions between topics over the most recent 5-year period are also detailed.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14963238      PMCID: PMC387295          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0307509100

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  13 in total

1.  Gastroenterology research in the United Kingdom: funding sources and impact.

Authors:  G Lewison
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  NETWORKS OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS.

Authors:  D J PRICE
Journal:  Science       Date:  1965-07-30       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Citation indexes for science; a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas.

Authors:  E GARFIELD
Journal:  Science       Date:  1955-07-15       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Characterization of the research papers of U.S. medical schools.

Authors:  P R McAllister; F Narin
Journal:  J Am Soc Inf Sci       Date:  1983-03

5.  From paragraph to graph: latent semantic analysis for information visualization.

Authors:  Thomas K Landauer; Darrell Laham; Marcia Derr
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-03-22       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Mixed-membership models of scientific publications.

Authors:  Elena Erosheva; Stephen Fienberg; John Lafferty
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-03-12       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Finding scientific topics.

Authors:  Thomas L Griffiths; Mark Steyvers
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-02-10       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  NIH funding and biomedical publication output.

Authors:  J D Frame; F Narin
Journal:  Fed Proc       Date:  1976-12

9.  Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research.

Authors:  P O Seglen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-02-15

10.  Citation indexing for studying science.

Authors:  E Garfield
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1970-08-15       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  10 in total

1.  Mapping topics and topic bursts in PNAS.

Authors:  Ketan K Mane; Katy Börner
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-02-20       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Evolution and convergence of the patterns of international scientific collaboration.

Authors:  Mario Coccia; Lili Wang
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Metrics associated with NIH funding: a high-level view.

Authors:  Kevin W Boyack; Paul Jordan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  How good is research really? Measuring the citation impact of publications with percentiles increases correct assessments and fair comparisons.

Authors:  Lutz Bornmann; Werner Marx
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-02-12       Impact factor: 8.807

5.  An analysis of the abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the Society for Neuroscience from 2001 to 2006.

Authors:  John M Lin; Jason W Bohland; Peter Andrews; Gully A P C Burns; Cara B Allen; Partha P Mitra
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-04-30       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  MeSH Now: automatic MeSH indexing at PubMed scale via learning to rank.

Authors:  Yuqing Mao; Zhiyong Lu
Journal:  J Biomed Semantics       Date:  2017-04-17

7.  Accessing Neuromarketing Scientific Performance: Research Gaps and Emerging Topics.

Authors:  Lucília Cardoso; Meng-Mei Chen; Arthur Araújo; Giovana Goretti Feijó de Almeida; Francisco Dias; Luiz Moutinho
Journal:  Behav Sci (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-21

8.  Looking for the impact of peer review: does count of funding acknowledgements really predict research impact?

Authors:  John Rigby
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 3.238

9.  Discrepancies among Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed coverage of funding information in medical journal articles.

Authors:  Peter Kokol; Helena Blažun Vošner
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2018-01-02

10.  Scientometric overview of nursing research on pain management.

Authors:  Hale Turhan Damar; Ozlem Bilik; Guzin Ozdagoglu; Aşkın Ozdagoglu; Muhammet Damar
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2018-09-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.