The scientific impact of nations
TL;DR: What different countries get for their research spending is illustrated in the chart below, which shows how research spending in these countries has changed over the past 50 years.
Abstract: To measure the quantity and quality od science in different nations, the author has analysed the numbers of research papers and reviews, and their citations. All data are were provided by Thomson ISI, previously known as the Institute for Scientific Information.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Fossil fuels have offered astounding opportunities during the 20th century in the rich countries of the western world, but now mankind has to face the challenges arising from fossil-fuel exploitation.
Abstract: Each generation is confronted with new challenges and new opportunities. In a restricted system like the Earth, however, opportunities discovered and exploited by a generation can cause challenges to the subsequent ones. Fossil fuels have offered astounding opportunities during the 20th century in the rich countries of the western world, but now mankind has to face the challenges arising from fossil-fuel exploitation. The proven reserves of fossil fuels are progressively decreasing, and their continued use produces harmful effects, such as pollution that threatens human health and greenhouse gases associated with global warming. Currently the world&s growing thirst for oil amounts to almost 1000 barrels a second, which means about 2 liters a day per each person living on the Earth (Figure 1). The current global energy consumption is equivalent to 13 terawatts (TW), that is, a steady 13 trillion watts of power demand. How long can we keep running this road?
1,532 citations
TL;DR: The overall frequency of positive supports has grown by over 22% between 1990 and 2007, with significant differences between disciplines and countries, which support the hypotheses that research is becoming less pioneering and/or that the objectivity with which results are produced and published is decreasing.
Abstract: Concerns that the growing competition for funding and citations might distort science are frequently discussed, but have not been verified directly. Of the hypothesized problems, perhaps the most worrying is a worsening of positive-outcome bias. A system that disfavours negative results not only distorts the scientific literature directly, but might also discourage high-risk projects and pressure scientists to fabricate and falsify their data. This study analysed over 4,600 papers published in all disciplines between 1990 and 2007, measuring the frequency of papers that, having declared to have "tested" a hypothesis, reported a positive support for it. The overall frequency of positive supports has grown by over 22% between 1990 and 2007, with significant differences between disciplines and countries. The increase was stronger in the social and some biomedical disciplines. The United States had published, over the years, significantly fewer positive results than Asian countries (and particularly Japan) but more than European countries (and in particular the United Kingdom). Methodological artefacts cannot explain away these patterns, which support the hypotheses that research is becoming less pioneering and/or that the objectivity with which results are produced and published is decreasing.
867 citations
TL;DR: There was convincing evidence that outcome reporting bias exists and has an impact on the pooled summary in systematic reviews, and empirical evidence suggests that published studies tended to report a greater treatment effect than those from the grey literature.
Abstract: Objectives To identify and appraise empirical studies on publication and related biases published since 1998; to assess methods to deal with publication and related biases; and to examine, in a random sample of published systematic reviews, measures taken to prevent, reduce and detect dissemination bias. Data sources The main literature search, in August 2008, covered the Cochrane Methodology Register Database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED and CINAHL. In May 2009, PubMed, PsycINFO and OpenSIGLE were also searched. Reference lists of retrieved studies were also examined. Review methods In Part I, studies were classified as evidence or method studies and data were extracted according to types of dissemination bias or methods for dealing with it. Evidence from empirical studies was summarised narratively. In Part II, 300 systematic reviews were randomly selected from MEDLINE and the methods used to deal with publication and related biases were assessed. Results Studies with significant or positive results were more likely to be published than those with non-significant or negative results, thereby confirming findings from a previous HTA report. There was convincing evidence that outcome reporting bias exists and has an impact on the pooled summary in systematic reviews. Studies with significant results tended to be published earlier than studies with non-significant results, and empirical evidence suggests that published studies tended to report a greater treatment effect than those from the grey literature. Exclusion of non-English-language studies appeared to result in a high risk of bias in some areas of research such as complementary and alternative medicine. In a few cases, publication and related biases had a potentially detrimental impact on patients or resource use. Publication bias can be prevented before a literature review (e.g. by prospective registration of trials), or detected during a literature review (e.g. by locating unpublished studies, funnel plot and related tests, sensitivity analysis modelling), or its impact can be minimised after a literature review (e.g. by confirmatory large-scale trials, updating the systematic review). The interpretation of funnel plot and related statistical tests, often used to assess publication bias, was often too simplistic and likely misleading. More sophisticated modelling methods have not been widely used. Compared with systematic reviews published in 1996, recent reviews of health-care interventions were more likely to locate and include non-English-language studies and grey literature or unpublished studies, and to test for publication bias. Conclusions Dissemination of research findings is likely to be a biased process, although the actual impact of such bias depends on specific circumstances. The prospective registration of clinical trials and the endorsement of reporting guidelines may reduce research dissemination bias in clinical research. In systematic reviews, measures can be taken to minimise the impact of dissemination bias by systematically searching for and including relevant studies that are difficult to access. Statistical methods can be useful for sensitivity analyses. Further research is needed to develop methods for qualitatively assessing the risk of publication bias in systematic reviews, and to evaluate the effect of prospective registration of studies, open access policy and improved publication guidelines.
844 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that the probability that an article is cited c times has large variations between different disciplines, but all distributions are rescaled on a universal curve when the relative indicator cf = c/c0 is considered, where c0 is the average number of citations per article for the discipline.
Abstract: We study the distributions of citations received by a single publication within several disciplines, spanning broad areas of science. We show that the probability that an article is cited c times has large variations between different disciplines, but all distributions are rescaled on a universal curve when the relative indicator cf = c/c0 is considered, where c0 is the average number of citations per article for the discipline. In addition we show that the same universal behavior occurs when citation distributions of articles published in the same field, but in different years, are compared. These findings provide a strong validation of cf as an unbiased indicator for citation performance across disciplines and years. Based on this indicator, we introduce a generalization of the h index suitable for comparing scientists working in different fields.
807 citations
01 Jan 2006
461 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: The United States took much pleasure last summer from its performance in the Olympic Games, where it won many more medals than any other country as mentioned in this paper. But was this the right measure of performance? Counting four points for gold, two for silver, one for bronze, and calculating the score relative to
Abstract: The United States took much pleasure last summer from its performance in the Olympic Games, where it won many more medals than any other country. But was this the right measure of performance? Counting four points for gold, two for silver, one for bronze, and calculating the score relative to
547 citations
TL;DR: It is argued that recent cutbacks in energy R&D are likely to reduce the capacity of the energy sector to innovate and are particularly troubling given the need for increased international capacity to respond to emerging risks such as global climate change.
Abstract: This Viewpoint examines data on international trends in energy research and development (RD (ii) U.S. RD and (iii) the R&D intensity of the U.S. energy sector is extremely low. It is argued that recent cutbacks in energy R&D are likely to reduce the capacity of the energy sector to innovate. The trends are particularly troubling given the need for increased international capacity to respond to emerging risks such as global climate change.
193 citations
TL;DR: The United States leads the world in the impact its research makes in almost every scientific domain, but European countries could challenge that if they were to divide their labours according to their strengths.
Abstract: The United States leads the world in the impact its research makes in almost every scientific domain. But European countries could challenge that if they were to divide their labours according to their strengths.
82 citations
TL;DR: The rankings of universities according to various criteria ranging from the quality of the educational experience imparted to their research prowess have become regular news items in English-speaking countries such as the UK where the core funding of universities is from central government as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: As the marketplace for research and education becomes ever more global, there is growing interest in international comparisons of standards and quality in different countries and places. Rankings of universities according to various criteria ranging from the quality of the educational experience imparted to their research prowess have become regular news items in English-speaking countries. In some countries such as the UK where the core funding of universities is from central government, such assessments are now used routinely for resource allocation.
72 citations
TL;DR: The next generation of policymakers and decision-makers will have to consider not only the future of science and technology but also their role in society at large.
Abstract: I n the world of the 21st century, critical issues related to science and technology (S&T) confront every nation. How can we stimulate growth in an information economy? How can we prevent global and regional environmental damage? What is the best way to introduce beneficial new technologies, thwart
35 citations