A large National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre facilitates impactful cross-disciplinary and collaborative translational research publications and research collaboration networks: a bibliometric evaluation study.
Author networks
Collaborative research
Research Institutions
Research outputs
Research productivity
Translational Research Organisations
Journal
Journal of translational medicine
ISSN: 1479-5876
Titre abrégé: J Transl Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101190741
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 11 2021
27 11 2021
Historique:
received:
04
10
2021
accepted:
15
11
2021
entrez:
28
11
2021
pubmed:
29
11
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The evaluation of translational health research is important for various reasons such as the research impact assessment, research funding allocation, accountability, and strategic research policy formulation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the research productivity, strength and diversity of research collaboration networks and impact of research supported by a large biomedical research centre in the United Kingdom (UK). Bibliometric analysis of research publications by translational researchers affiliated with the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) from April 2012 to March 2017. Analysis included 2377 translational research publications that were published during the second 5-year funding period of the NIHR Oxford BRC. Author details were available for 99.75% of the publications with DOIs (2359 of 2365 with DOIs), and the number of authors per publication was median 9 (mean = 18.03, SD = 3.63, maximum = 2467 authors). Author lists also contained many consortia, groups, committees, and teams (n = 165 in total), with 1238 additional contributors, where membership was reported. The BRC co-authorship i.e., research collaboration network for these publications involved 20,229 nodes (authors, of which 1606 nodes had Oxford affiliations), and approximately 4.3 million edges (authorship linkages). Articles with a valid DOIs (2365 of 2377, 99.5%) were collectively cited more than 155,000 times and the average Field Citation Ratio was median 6.75 (geometric mean = 7.12) while the average Relative Citation Ratio was median 1.50 (geometric mean = 1.83) for the analysed publications. The NIHR Oxford BRC generated substantial translational research publications and facilitated a huge collaborative network of translational researchers working in complex structures and consortia, which shows success across the whole of this BRC funding period. Further research involving continued uptake of unique persistent identifiers and the tracking of other research outputs such as clinical innovations and patents would allow a more detailed understanding of large research enterprises such as NIHR BRCs in the UK.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The evaluation of translational health research is important for various reasons such as the research impact assessment, research funding allocation, accountability, and strategic research policy formulation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the research productivity, strength and diversity of research collaboration networks and impact of research supported by a large biomedical research centre in the United Kingdom (UK).
METHODS
Bibliometric analysis of research publications by translational researchers affiliated with the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) from April 2012 to March 2017.
RESULTS
Analysis included 2377 translational research publications that were published during the second 5-year funding period of the NIHR Oxford BRC. Author details were available for 99.75% of the publications with DOIs (2359 of 2365 with DOIs), and the number of authors per publication was median 9 (mean = 18.03, SD = 3.63, maximum = 2467 authors). Author lists also contained many consortia, groups, committees, and teams (n = 165 in total), with 1238 additional contributors, where membership was reported. The BRC co-authorship i.e., research collaboration network for these publications involved 20,229 nodes (authors, of which 1606 nodes had Oxford affiliations), and approximately 4.3 million edges (authorship linkages). Articles with a valid DOIs (2365 of 2377, 99.5%) were collectively cited more than 155,000 times and the average Field Citation Ratio was median 6.75 (geometric mean = 7.12) while the average Relative Citation Ratio was median 1.50 (geometric mean = 1.83) for the analysed publications.
CONCLUSIONS
The NIHR Oxford BRC generated substantial translational research publications and facilitated a huge collaborative network of translational researchers working in complex structures and consortia, which shows success across the whole of this BRC funding period. Further research involving continued uptake of unique persistent identifiers and the tracking of other research outputs such as clinical innovations and patents would allow a more detailed understanding of large research enterprises such as NIHR BRCs in the UK.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34838033
doi: 10.1186/s12967-021-03149-x
pii: 10.1186/s12967-021-03149-x
pmc: PMC8626935
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
483Subventions
Organisme : British Heart Foundation
ID : CH/16/1/32013
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : British Heart Foundation
ID : SP/17/16/33519
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
ID : Research Grant Number IS-BRC-1215- 20008
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Scientometrics. 2020 Dec;125(3):2349-2382
pubmed: 33746311
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Aug 14;15(1):70
pubmed: 28806989
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Aug 16;4(Suppl 8):e001450
pubmed: 31478019
J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996 Jan;1(1):35-43
pubmed: 10180843
Sci Transl Med. 2011 May 25;3(84):84cm13
pubmed: 21613620
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Mar 28;15(1):26
pubmed: 28351391
PLoS One. 2011 Mar 04;6(3):e17428
pubmed: 21394198
Science. 1995 Apr 7;268(5207):25
pubmed: 7701334
Science. 2010 Sep 17;329(5998):1466
pubmed: 20847251
Gigascience. 2019 Jun 1;8(6):
pubmed: 31144712
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Mar 3;117(9):4609-4616
pubmed: 32071248
JAMA. 1997 Mar 19;277(11):909-14
pubmed: 9062330
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 May 20;14:225
pubmed: 24885971
BMJ Open. 2021 Mar 23;11(3):e037935
pubmed: 33757940
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2014;27(8):760-76
pubmed: 25417380
Lancet. 2012 Jun 23;379(9834):2352-63
pubmed: 22632908
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Jun 11;110(24):9680-5
pubmed: 23720314
Nature. 2015 Apr 23;520(7548):429-31
pubmed: 25903611
J Clin Transl Sci. 2020 Apr 02;4(4):336-344
pubmed: 33244415
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2016 Jun;26(6):453-4
pubmed: 27353977
PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e57546
pubmed: 23469021
Autophagy. 2016;12(1):1-222
pubmed: 26799652
Scientometrics. 2010 Aug;84(2):523-538
pubmed: 20585380
J Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Feb;1(1):45-52
pubmed: 28480055
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 11;12(7):e0179722
pubmed: 28700651
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013 Jul 26;13:77
pubmed: 23885955
Clin Transl Sci. 2011 Jun;4(3):153-62
pubmed: 21707944
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2018 Sep 06;4:433-443
pubmed: 30294659
JAMA. 2003 Mar 12;289(10):1278-87
pubmed: 12633190