Scientometrics

, Volume 103, Issue 3, pp 923–938 | Cite as

How is credit given to networking centres in their publications? A case study of the Spanish CIBER research structures

Article

Abstract

The emergence of new networking research organisations is explained by the need to promote excellence in research and to facilitate the resolution of specific problems. This study focuses on a Spanish case, the Biomedical Research Networking Centres (CIBER), created through a partnership of research groups, without physical proximity, who work on common health related issues. These structures are a great challenge for bibliometricians due to their heterogeneous composition and virtual nature. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to assess different approaches based on addresses, funding acknowledgements and authors to explore which search strategy or combination is more effective to identify CIBER publications. To this end, we downloaded all the Spanish publications from the Web of Science databases, in the subject categories of Gastroenterology/Hepatology and Psychiatry during the period 2008–2011. Our results showed that, taken alone, the dataset based on addresses identified more than 60 % of all potential CIBER publications. However, the best outcome was obtained by combining it with additional datasets based on funding acknowledgements and on authors, recovering more than 80 % of all possible CIBER publications without losing accuracy. In terms of bibliometric performance, all the CIBER sets showed scores above the country average, thus proving the relevance of these virtual organisations. Finally, given the increasing importance of these structures and the fact that authors do not always mention their connection to CIBER, some recommendations are offered to develop clear policies on how, when and where to specify this relationship.

Keywords

Networking centres Bibliometric data collection Address analysis Funding acknowledgements Author analysis Psychiatry Gastroenterology/Hepatology 

References

  1. Caron, E., & van Eck, N. J. (2014). Large scale author name disambiguation using rule-based scoring and clustering. In Proceedings of STI 2014 Leiden. Retrieved from http://sti2014.cwts.nl/download/f-y2w2.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2014.
  2. CIBERESP (2007). FIRMA CIBERESP. Retrieved from http://www.ciberesp.es/files/Firma_CIBERESP.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2014.
  3. Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2007). Algoritmos para solventar la falta de normalización de nombres de autor en los estudios bibliométricos. Investigación Bibliotecológica, 21(42), 13–32.Google Scholar
  4. Costas, R., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2012). Approaching the ‘reward triangle’: General analysis of the presence of funding acknowledgments and ‘peer interactive communication’ in scientific publications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1647–1661. doi:10.1002/asi.22692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cruz-Castro, L., Sanz-Menéndez, L., & Martínez, C. (2012). Research centers in transition: Patterns of converge and diversity. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 18–42. doi:10.1007/s10961-010-9168-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Delgado Rodríguez, M. (2012). CIBERESP: Un instrumento para la promoción y la difusión de la investigación de excelencia española. Gaceta Sanitaria, 26(5), 393–394. doi:10.1016/j.gaceta.2012.05.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Demotes-Mainard, J., & Ohmann, C. (2005). European clinical research infrastructures network: Promoting harmonisation and quality in European clinical research. The Lancet, 365(9454), 107–108. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17720-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Díaz-Faes, A. A., & Bordons, M. (2014). Acknowledgements in scientific publications: Presence in Spanish science and text patterns across disciplines. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(9), 1834–1849. doi:10.1002/asi.23081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. García-Zorita, C., Martín-Moreno, C., Lascurain-Sánchez, M. L., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2006). Institutional addresses in the Web of Science: The effects on scientific evaluation. Journal of Information Science, 32(4), 378–383. doi:10.1177/0165551506065813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garner, J., Porter, A. L., Newman, N. C., & Crowl, T. A. (2012). Assessing research network and disciplinary engagement changes induced by an NSF program. Research Evaluation, 21(2), 89–104. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvs004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jiang, Y., Zheng, H.-T., Wang, X., Lu, B., & Wu, K. (2011). Affiliation disambiguation for constructing semantic digital libraries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(6), 1029–1041. doi:10.1002/asi.21538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Méndez Vásquez, R. I., Suñén Pinyol, E., Olivé Vázquez, G., Cervelló González, R., & Camí, J. (2009). Caracterización bibliométrica de la produccién en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (EPI-SP) de España, 19972006. Barcelona. Retrieved from http://bac.fundaciorecerca.cat/ciberesp/docs/Bibliometria_CIBERESP.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2014.
  13. Morillo, F., Díaz-Faes, A. A., González-Albo, B., & Moreno, L. (2014). Do networking centres perform better? An exploratory analysis in Psychiatry and Gastroenterology/Hepatology in Spain. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1401–1416. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1183-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morillo, F., Santabárbara, I., & Aparicio, J. (2013). The automatic normalisation challenge: Detailed addresses identification. Scientometrics, 95(3), 953–966. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-0965-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Praal, F., Kosten, J., Calero-Medina, C., & Visser, M. S. (2013). Ranking universities: The challenge of affiliated institutes. In Translational twists and turns: Science and socio-economic endeavour. Proceedings of STI 2013 Berlin. Retrieved from http://www.forschungsinfo.de/STI2013/download/STI_2013_Proceedings.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2014.
  16. Rank, D., & Williams, D. (1999). Partial benefit/cost in the evaluation of the Canadian networks of centres of excellence. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22(1), 121–129. doi:10.1016/S0149-7189(98)00048-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reijnhoudt, L., Costas, R., Noyons, E., Boerner, K., & Scharnhorst, A. (2013). ‘Seed + Expand’: A validated methodology for creating high quality publication oeuvres of individual researchers. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.5177. Accessed December 3, 2014.Google Scholar
  18. Sirtes, D. (2013). Funding acknowledgments for the German Research Foundation (DFG). The dirty data of the Web of Science database and how to clean it up. In Proceedings of ISSI 2013 Vienna. Retrieved from http://www.issi2013.org/Images/ISSI_Proceedings_Volume_I.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2014.
  19. Smalheiser, N. R., & Torvik, V. I. (2009). Author name disambiguation. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1–43. doi:10.1002/aris.2009.1440430113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2011). Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 37–47. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wang, J., & Shapira, P. (2014). Is there a relationship between research sponsorship and publication impact? An analysis of funding acknowledgments in nanotechnology papers. Retrieved from http://media.eurekalert.org/aaasnewsroom/MCM/FIL_000000001425/funding_and_research_impact-rev_2014.pdf. Accessed September 11, 2014

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fernanda Morillo
    • 1
  • Rodrigo Costas
    • 2
  • María Bordons
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Human and Social Sciences (CCHS)Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)MadridSpain
  2. 2.Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)Leiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations