Literature DB >> 29404974

Productivity of CNPq Researchers from Different Fields in Biomedical Sciences: The Need for Objective Bibliometric Parameters-A Report from Brazil.

Jean Paul Kamdem1,2,3, Daniel Henrique Roos4, Adekunle Adeniran Sanmi5, Luciana Calabró6, Amos Olalekan Abolaji7, Cláudia Sirlene de Oliveira8, Luiz Marivando Barros9, Antonia Eliene Duarte9, Nilda Vargas Barbosa8, Diogo Onofre Souza6, João Batista Teixeira Rocha10.   

Abstract

In Brazil, the CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) provides grants, funds and fellowships to productive scientists to support their investigations. They are ranked and categorized into four hierarchical levels ranging from PQ 1A (the highest) to PQ 1D (the lowest). Few studies, however, report and analyse scientific productivity in different sub-fields of Biomedical Sciences (BS), e.g., Biochemistry, Pharmacology, Biophysics and Physiology. In fact, systematic comparisons of productivity among the PQ 1 categories within the above sub-fields are lacking in the literature. Here, the scientific productivity of 323 investigators receiving PQ 1 fellowships (A to D levels) in these sub-fields of BS was investigated. The Scopus database was used to compile the total number of articles, citations, h-index values and authorship positions (first-, co- or last-listed author) in the most cited papers by researchers granted CNPq fellowships. We found that researchers from Pharmacology had the best performance for all of the parameters analysed, followed by those in Biochemistry. There was great variability in scientific productivity within the PQ 1A level in all of the sub-fields of BS, but not within the other levels (1B, 1C and 1D). Analysis of the most cited papers of PQ 1(A-D) researchers in Pharmacology revealed that the citations of researchers in the 1C and 1D levels were associated with publications with their senior supervisors, whereas those in the 1B level were less connected with their supervisors in comparison to those in 1A. Taken together, these findings suggest that the scientific performance of PQ 1A researchers in BS is not homogenous. In our opinion, parameters such as the most cited papers without the involvement of Ph.D. and/or post-doctoral supervisors should be used to make decisions regarding any given researcher's fellowship award level.

Keywords:  Biomedical Sciences; CAPES; CNPq; CNPq researchers; Citations

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29404974     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-018-0025-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  14 in total

1.  Impact factors: just part of a research treadmill.

Authors:  Leopoldo de Meis; Maria Scarlet do Carmo; Carla de Meis
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-08-14       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The new geography of scientific collaborations. Changing patterns in the geography of science pose ethical challenges for collaborations between established and emerging scientific powers.

Authors:  Sonia M R Vasconcelos; Nicholas H Steneck; Melissa Anderson; Hatisaburo Masuda; Marisa Palacios; José C S Pinto; Martha M Sorenson
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 8.807

3.  H-index in the Brazilian Academy of Sciences: comments and concerns.

Authors:  Alexander W A Kellner; Luiza C M O Ponciano
Journal:  An Acad Bras Cienc       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.753

4.  [Scientific output: quality assessment or an accountant's tale?].

Authors:  Kenneth Rochel de Camargo
Journal:  Cad Saude Publica       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.632

5.  Comparison of scientists of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA on the basis of the h-index.

Authors:  R Mugnaini; A L Packer; R Meneghini
Journal:  Braz J Med Biol Res       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.590

6.  Author Productivity Index: Without Distortions.

Authors:  Marton Demeter
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 3.525

7.  Scientific Performance of Brazilian Researchers in Pharmacology with grants from CNPq: A comparative study within the Brazilian categories.

Authors:  Jean P Kamdem; Amos O Abolaji; Daniel H Roos; Luciana Calabró; Nilda V Barbosa; Diogo O Souza; João Batista T Rocha
Journal:  An Acad Bras Cienc       Date:  2016-08-15       Impact factor: 1.753

8.  Brazilian Science between National and Foreign Journals: Methodology for Analyzing the Production and Impact in Emerging Scientific Communities.

Authors:  Letícia Strehl; Luciana Calabró; Diogo Onofre Souza; Lívio Amaral
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  China's growing contribution to global intracranial aneurysm research (1991-2012): a bibliometric study.

Authors:  Ze-jun Jia; Bo Hong; Da-ming Chen; Qing-hai Huang; Zhi-gang Yang; Cha Yin; Xiao-qun Deng; Jian-min Liu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Publish or perish: Where are we heading?

Authors:  Seema Rawat; Sanjay Meena
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.852

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.