IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v81y2009i3d10.1007_s11192-009-2191-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Outcomes associated with ophthalmology, optometry and visual science literature in the Science Citation Index from mainland China, 2000–2007

Author

Listed:
  • Feng Zou

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Mingxing Wu

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Kaili Wu

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

Abstract

Bibliographic data on ophthalmology, optometry and visual science (OOVS) literature of China drawn from the SCI-Expanded database covering the period 2000–2007 (961 publications) were analyzed to create a comprehensive overview of research output. Of 961 articles, 480 were published in 2006 and 2007. The majority of researchers worked in university hospitals (53%). 21% of the publications included one or more international co-authors. For each article, the average author number was 4.96±2.73, which increased from 3.96 in 2000 to 5.36 in 2007. The most cited references came from Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science and Ophthalmology. The greatest number of studies was focused on the retina.

Suggested Citation

  • Feng Zou & Mingxing Wu & Kaili Wu, 2009. "Outcomes associated with ophthalmology, optometry and visual science literature in the Science Citation Index from mainland China, 2000–2007," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 671-682, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:81:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-009-2191-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-2191-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-009-2191-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-009-2191-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Davis & C. S. Wilson & W. W. Hood, 1999. "Ophthalmology and optics: An informetric study of Australia's contribution to fields in the Vision Science domain, 1991–95," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 46(3), pages 399-416, November.
    2. Weeks, William B & Wallace, Amy E & Kimberly, B.C.Surott, 2004. "Changes in authorship patterns in prestigious US medical journals," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(9), pages 1949-1954, November.
    3. Donatella Ugolini & Marco Amedeo Cimmino & Cristina Casilli & Giuseppe Sandro Mela, 2001. "How the European Union writes about ophthalmology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(1), pages 45-58, September.
    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. Hui-Zhen Fu & Xiao Long & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "China’s research in chemical engineering journals in Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 119-136, January.

    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. Pentti Riikonen & Mauno Vihinen, 2008. "National research contributions: A case study on Finnish biomedical research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 207-222, November.
    2. Chi, Yuxue & Tang, Xianyi & Liu, Yijun, 2022. "Exploring the “awakening effect” in knowledge diffusion: a case study of publications in the library and information science domain," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    3. Gómez-Ferri, Javier & González-Alcaide, Gregorio & LLopis-Goig, Ramón, 2019. "Measuring dissatisfaction with coauthorship: An empirical approach based on the researchers’ perception," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    4. Abdelghani Maddi & Lesya Baudoin, 2022. "The quality of the web of science data: a longitudinal study on the completeness of authors-addresses links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6279-6292, November.
    5. Claude Robert & Concepción S. Wilson & Jean-François Gaudy & Charles-Daniel Arreto, 2006. "A snapshot of EU publications in sleep research: A scientometric survey," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 385-405, June.
    6. Edson Melo Souza & Jose Eduardo Storopoli & Wonder Alexandre Luz Alves, 2022. "Scientific Contribution List Categories Investigation: a comparison between three mainstream medical journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2249-2276, May.
    7. Wilfred Dang & Matthew D F McInnes & Ania Z Kielar & Jiho Hong, 2015. "A Comprehensive Analysis of Authorship in Radiology Journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    8. Jason Cory Brunson & Xiaoyan Wang & Reinhard C Laubenbacher, 2017. "Effects of research complexity and competition on the incidence and growth of coauthorship in biomedicine," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, March.
    9. Enrico di Bella & Luca Gandullia & Sara Preti, 2021. "Analysis of scientific collaboration network of Italian Institute of Technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8517-8539, October.
    10. Nigel Golden & Kadambari Devarajan & Cathleen Balantic & Joseph Drake & Michael T Hallworth & Toni Lyn Morelli, 2021. "Ten simple rules for productive lab meetings," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-13, May.
    11. Adam Emmer, 2019. "The careers behind and the impact of solo author articles in Nature and Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 825-840, August.
    12. John P A Ioannidis, 2008. "Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(7), pages 1-8, July.
    13. Gertrude Case Buehring & Jessica E. Buehring & Patrick D. Gerard, 2007. "Lost in citation: Vanishing visibility of senior authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 459-468, September.
    14. Mari Davis & Concepción S. Wilson, 2001. "Elite Researchers in Ophthalmology: Aspects of Publishing Strategies, Collaboration and Multi-Disciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(3), pages 395-410, November.
    15. Claude Robert & Concepción S. Wilson & Stéphane Donnadieu & Jean-François Gaudy & Charles-Daniel Arreto, 2009. "Analysis of the medical and biological pain research literature in the European Union: A 2006 snapshot," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 693-716, September.
    16. Donatella Ugolini & Marco Amedeo Cimmino & Cristina Casilli & Giuseppe Sandro Mela, 2001. "How the European Union writes about ophthalmology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(1), pages 45-58, September.
    17. Robert Claude & Arreto Charles-Daniel & Azerad Jean & Gaudy Jean-Francois, 2004. "Bibliometric overview of the utilization of artificial neural networks in medicine and biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(1), pages 117-130, January.
    18. K. C. Garg, 2003. "An overview of cross-national, national, and institutional assessment as reflected in the international journal Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 56(2), pages 169-199, January.
    19. Mercedes Echeverria & David Stuart & Tobias Blanke, 2015. "Medical theses and derivative articles: dissemination of contents and publication patterns," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 559-586, January.
    20. Dan Greenberg & Allison B. Rosen & Oren Wacht & Jennifer Palmer & Peter J. Neumann, 2010. "A Bibliometric Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in the Economic and Medical Literature: 1976-2006," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(3), pages 320-327, May.

    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:spr:scient:v:81:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-009-2191-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.