Global Research Output of Nanobiotechnology Research: a Scientometrics Study

An effective scientometric analysis based on SCOPUS database was conducted to evaluate nanobiotechnology research from a different perspective for the period 2003-2012. Nanobiotechnology has been intensively investigated by bibliometric methods due to its technological importance and expected impacts on economic activity. The present study analyses nanobiotechnology research output during 2003-2012 on different parameters, including the growth, global publications share and citation impact, share of international collaborative papers and contributions of major collaborative partner countries. A total of 114,684 papers were published during 10 years, which received 2,503,795 citations with an average of 21.83 citations per paper. It has been observed that during 2003-2012, USA held the first position by number of publications (34,736), h-index (349), g-index (541), hg-index (434.52) and p-index (326.47). Developing countries such as India, China, South Korea and Canada showed increasing trends in their publications and their activity index also showed increasing trends. Top 10 institutions contributed 7.16% share of total publications. Masssachusetts Institute of Technology, USA received the highest h-index (120) among the top 10 institutions. Biomaterials (1631) was the top journal of publication output; Nano Letters had the highest impact with an average citation per paper (73.86) and American Chemical Society received the highest h-index (158) among the top 10 journals.

[1]  S. Gopalakrishnan,et al.  Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009 , 2011, Scientometrics.

[2]  Zan Huang,et al.  International nanotechnology development in 2003: Country, institution, and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database , 2004 .

[3]  Peter Vinkler,et al.  Application of the distribution of citations among publications in scientometric evaluations , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Jesse A. Stump,et al.  The structure and infrastructure of the global nanotechnology literature , 2006 .

[5]  R. Kostoff,et al.  The seminal literature of nanotechnology research , 2006 .

[6]  Zakir Hossain,et al.  Prospects and applications of nanobiotechnology: a medical perspective , 2012, Journal of Nanobiotechnology.

[7]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[8]  Teruo Okazaki,et al.  Capturing Nanotechnology's Current State of Development via Analysis of Patents. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2007/4. , 2007 .

[9]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Connecting NSF funding to patent innovation in nanotechnology (2001–2004) , 2006 .

[10]  Joachim Schummer.  The global institutionalization of nanotechnology research: A bibliometric approach to the assessment of science policy , 2007, Scientometrics.

[11]  Ehud Gazit,et al.  Plenty of Room for Biology at the Bottom: An Introduction to Bionanotechnology , 2007 .

[12]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Characteristic scores and scales: A bibliometric analysis of subject characteristics based on long-term citation observation , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[13]  Hajime Eto.  Interdisciplinary information input and output of a nano-technology project , 2004, Scientometrics.

[14]  P. Zhou,et al.  The Emergence of China as a Leading Nation in Science. Research Policy, 35(1), 2006, 83-104. , 2006, 0911.3421.

[15]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  A longitudinal analysis of nanotechnology literature: 1976–2004 , 2008 .

[16]  K. Subramanyam,et al.  Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review , 1983 .

[17]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[18]  Gangan Prathap,et al.  The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index , 2010, Scientometrics.

[19]  Martin S. Meyer,et al.  Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology:An exploration of nano-science and nano-technology , 2001, Scientometrics.

[20]  Angela Hullmann,et al.  Measuring and assessing the development of nanotechnology , 2007, Scientometrics.

[21]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis , 2007, Scientometrics.

[22]  M. McAleer,et al.  Nanotechnology strength indicators: international rankings based on US patents , 2003 .

[23]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Gatekeeping patterns in nano-titled journals , 2007, Scientometrics.

[24]  Zan Huang,et al.  Longitudinal Patent Analysis for Nanoscale Science and Engineering: Country, Institution and Technology Field , 2003 .

[25]  Moin Ahmad,et al.  CITATION MAPPING OF PUBLISHED LITERATURE ON EMBELIA RIBES , 2005 .

[26]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies , 2004, Scientometrics.

[27]  Zan Huang,et al.  Longitudinal Nanotechnology Development (1991--2002): National Science Foundation Funding and its Impact on Patents , 2005 .

[28]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[29]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[30]  Hajar Sotudeh,et al.  Gender differences in science: the case of scientific productivity in Nano Science & Technology during 2005–2007 , 2013, Scientometrics.

[31]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Building a scientific knowledge web portal: The NanoPort experience , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[32]  K. Abromeit.  Music Received , 2023, Notes.

[33]  Peter Vinkler,et al.  The πv-index: a new indicator to characterize the impact of journals , 2010, Scientometrics.

[34]  Anastassios Pouris.  Nanoscale research in South Africa: A mapping exercise based on scientometrics , 2007, Scientometrics.

[35]  Gilda Massari Coelho,et al.  Text mining as a valuable tool in foresight exercises: A study on nanotechnology , 2006 .

[36]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  hg-index: a new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g-indices , 2010, Scientometrics.