IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0180375.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientometric and patentometric analyses to determine the knowledge landscape in innovative technologies: The case of 3D bioprinting

Author

Listed:
  • Marisela Rodríguez-Salvador
  • Rosa María Rio-Belver
  • Gaizka Garechana-Anacabe

Abstract

This research proposes an innovative data model to determine the landscape of emerging technologies. It is based on a competitive technology intelligence methodology that incorporates the assessment of scientific publications and patent analysis production, and is further supported by experts’ feedback. It enables the definition of the growth rate of scientific and technological output in terms of the top countries, institutions and journals producing knowledge within the field as well as the identification of main areas of research and development by analyzing the International Patent Classification codes including keyword clusterization and co-occurrence of patent assignees and patent codes. This model was applied to the evolving domain of 3D bioprinting. Scientific documents from the Scopus and Web of Science databases, along with patents from 27 authorities and 140 countries, were retrieved. In total, 4782 scientific publications and 706 patents were identified from 2000 to mid-2016. The number of scientific documents published and patents in the last five years showed an annual average growth of 20% and 40%, respectively. Results indicate that the most prolific nations and institutions publishing on 3D bioprinting are the USA and China, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA), Nanyang Technological University (Singapore) and Tsinghua University (China), respectively. Biomaterials and Biofabrication are the predominant journals. The most prolific patenting countries are China and the USA; while Organovo Holdings Inc. (USA) and Tsinghua University (China) are the institutions leading. International Patent Classification codes reveal that most 3D bioprinting inventions intended for medical purposes apply porous or cellular materials or biologically active materials. Knowledge clusters and expert drivers indicate that there is a research focus on tissue engineering including the fabrication of organs, bioinks and new 3D bioprinting systems. Our model offers a guide to researchers to understand the knowledge production of pioneering technologies, in this case 3D bioprinting.

Suggested Citation

  • Marisela Rodríguez-Salvador & Rosa María Rio-Belver & Gaizka Garechana-Anacabe, 2017. "Scientometric and patentometric analyses to determine the knowledge landscape in innovative technologies: The case of 3D bioprinting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0180375
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180375
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180375&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0180375?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pao-Long Chang & Chao-Chan Wu & Hoang-Jyh Leu, 2010. "Using patent analyses to monitor the technological trends in an emerging field of technology: a case of carbon nanotube field emission display," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 5-19, January.
    2. Ronald N. Kostoff & Raymond G. Koytcheff & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2007. "Global nanotechnology research metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 565-601, March.
    3. Gaizka Garechana & Rosa Rio-Belver & Ernesto Cilleruelo & Jaso Larruscain Sarasola, 2015. "Clusterization and mapping of waste recycling science. Evolution of research from 2002 to 2012," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(7), pages 1431-1446, July.
    4. Gaizka Garechana & Rosa Río-Belver & Iñaki Bildosola & Marisela Rodríguez Salvador, 2017. "Effects of innovation management system standardization on firms: evidence from text mining annual reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1987-1999, June.
    5. Peng Hui Lv & Gui-Fang Wang & Yong Wan & Jia Liu & Qing Liu & Fei-cheng Ma, 2011. "Bibliometric trend analysis on global graphene research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 399-419, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bicudo, Edison & Faulkner, Alex & Li, Phoebe, 2021. "Sociotechnical alignment in biomedicine: The 3D bioprinting market beyond technology convergence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Shu-Hao Chang & Chin-Yuan Fan, 2020. "Using Patent Technology Networks to Observe Neurocomputing Technology Hotspots and Development Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. René Lezama-Nicolás & Marisela Rodríguez-Salvador & Rosa Río-Belver & Iñaki Bildosola, 2018. "A bibliometric method for assessing technological maturity: the case of additive manufacturing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1425-1452, December.
    4. Block, Carolin & Wustmans, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2021. "Semantic bridging of patents and scientific publications – The case of an emerging sustainability-oriented technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Shuto Miyashita & Shogo Katoh & Tomohiro Anzai & Shintaro Sengoku, 2020. "Intellectual Property Management in Publicly Funded R&D Program and Projects: Optimizing Principal–Agent Relationship through Transdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Thabang Lazarus Bambo & Anastassios Pouris, 2020. "Bibliometric analysis of bioeconomy research in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 29-51, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Goio Etxebarria & Mikel Gomez-Uranga & Jon Barrutia, 2012. "Tendencies in scientific output on carbon nanotubes and graphene in global centers of excellence for nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 253-268, April.
    2. Guijie Zhang & Yuqiang Feng & Guang Yu & Luning Liu & Yanqiqi Hao, 2017. "Analyzing the time delay between scientific research and technology patents based on the citation distribution model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1287-1306, June.
    3. Ahmad Barirani & Bruno Agard & Catherine Beaudry, 2013. "Discovering and assessing fields of expertise in nanomedicine: a patent co-citation network perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1111-1136, March.
    4. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.
    5. Bhagaban Behera, 2013. "Drug Trafficking as a Non-Traditional Security Threat to Central Asian States," Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, , vol. 17(2), pages 229-251, December.
    6. Curci, Ylenia & Mongeau Ospina, Christian A., 2016. "Investigating biofuels through network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 60-72.
    7. Minchul Lee & Min Song, 2020. "Incorporating citation impact into analysis of research trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1191-1224, August.
    8. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    9. Jiancheng Guan & Gangbo Wang, 2010. "A comparative study of research performance in nanotechnology for China’s inventor–authors and their non-inventing peers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 331-343, August.
    10. Mario Coccia, 2011. "Evolutionary dynamics and scientific flows of nanotechnology research across geo-economic areas," CERIS Working Paper 201101, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    11. Rolfe, John & Flint, Nicole, 2018. "Assessing the economic benefits of a tourist access road: A case study in regional coastal Australia," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 167-178.
    12. Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "Regional development and interregional collaboration in the growth of nanotechnology research in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 299-315, February.
    13. René Lezama-Nicolás & Marisela Rodríguez-Salvador & Rosa Río-Belver & Iñaki Bildosola, 2018. "A bibliometric method for assessing technological maturity: the case of additive manufacturing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1425-1452, December.
    14. Xiaoli Wang & Yun Liu & Lingdi Chen & Yifan Zhang, 2022. "Correlation Monitoring Method and model of Science-Technology-Industry in the AI Field: A Case of the Neural Network," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    15. Ying Huang & Donghua Zhu & Yue Qian & Yi Zhang & Alan L. Porter & Yuqin Liu & Ying Guo, 2017. "A hybrid method to trace technology evolution pathways: a case study of 3D printing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 185-204, April.
    16. M-Chukri Idris & Alptekin Durmuşoğlu, 2021. "Innovation Management Systems and Standards: A Systematic Literature Review and Guidance for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-31, July.
    17. Janghyeok Yoon & Sungchul Choi & Kwangsoo Kim, 2011. "Invention property-function network analysis of patents: a case of silicon-based thin film solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 687-703, March.
    18. Alba Santa Soriano & Carolina Lorenzo Álvarez & Rosa María Torres Valdés, 2018. "Bibliometric analysis to identify an emerging research area: Public Relations Intelligence—a challenge to strengthen technological observatories in the network society," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1591-1614, June.
    19. Christian Mühlroth & Michael Grottke, 2018. "A systematic literature review of mining weak signals and trends for corporate foresight," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(5), pages 643-687, July.
    20. Catherine Beaudry & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2011. "Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 665-679, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0180375. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.