, Volume 106, Issue 2, pp 525–537 | Cite as

Intellectual structure in stem cell research: exploring Brazilian scientific articles from 2001 to 2010

  • Raymundo das Neves Machado
  • Benjamín Vargas-Quesada
  • Jacqueline Leta


With the advent of co-citation techniques in the 1960’s, studies on citation shifted from simple quantifications of the number of citations per document to more complex analyses focusing on the relationship between citations. The present study seeks to map the scientific and cognitive structure of Brazilian stem cell publications. Brazilian publications from 2001 to 2010 were retrieved from the Web of Science database, and data on journal co-citations were processed with the help of VOSViewer software. The results indicated that Brazilian stem cell publications are characterised by a strong emphasis on co-cited journals in the fields of biochemistry and molecular biology, cell biology and haematology. Such characteristics suggest that Brazilian stem cell research is oriented both towards the treatment of a variety of human diseases and injuries caused by accidents (research with stem cells) as well as the understanding of stem cells’ mechanisms of division, differentiation and self-renewal (research on stem cells), the most promising facet of stem cells. The progress in Brazilian stem cell research likely results from a combination of a federal law established in the 2000’s, which regulates stem cell use and research, and the growth of Brazilian science.


Co-citation Journal co-citation Brazilian science Stem cell 



The authors thank Dr. Fabio Castro Gouveia and Dr. Stevens Kastrup Rehen for their critical review of the manuscript. Authors are also grateful to Capes/Brazilian Ministry Education that awarded a fellowship to Raymundo das Neves Machado (Process No. 8264-13-9).


  1. An, X. Y., & Wu, Q. Q. (2011). Co-word analysis of the trends in stem cells field based on subject heading weighting. Scientometrics, 88(1), 133–144.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barfoot, J., Kemp, E., Doherty, K., Blackburn, C., Sengoku, S., van Servellen, A., Gavai, A., & Karlsson, A. (2013). Stem cell research: Trends in and perspectives on the evolving international landscape. Accessed on 25 June 2013.
  3. Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (2010). Pajek: Program for analysis and visualization of large networks. Reference manual list of commands with short explanation version 2.00. University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google Scholar
  4. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bydlowski, S. P., Debes, A. A., Maselli, L. M. F., & Janz, F. L. (2009). Características biológicas das células-tronco mesenquimais. Revista Brasileira de Hematologia e Hemoterapia, 31(Supl. 1), 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cantos-Mateos, G., Vargas-Quesada, B., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., & Zulueta-García, M. A. (2012). Stem cell research: Bibliometric analysis of main research areas through KeyWords Plus. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 64(6), 561–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carvalho, M. A., Coelho, C. J., Carvalho, Y. K., Silva, M. A., Marques, L. G., & Santos, M. R. (2014). Correlação entre publicações científicas e patentes com células-tronco pluripotente induzidas (ips): bases para uma prospecção tecnológica. Revista GEINTEC, 4(5), 1574–1582. Accessed on 25 January 2015.
  8. Copelan, E. A. (2006). Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. New England Journal of Medicine, 354, 1813–1826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cyranoski, D. (2008). Stem cells: 5 things to know before jumping on the iPS bandwagon. Nature, 452, 406–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dupont, B. (1997). Immunology of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a brief review of its history. Immunological Reviews, 157(1), 5–12.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gronthos, S., Mankani, M., Brahim, J., Robey, P. G., & Shi, S. (2000). Postnatal human dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) in vitro and in vivo. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(25), 13625–13630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hair, J. F, Jr, Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Análise multivariada de Dados (6th ed.). Porto Alegre: Bookman.Google Scholar
  13. Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005) Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California, Riverside. Published in digital form at
  14. Hyun, I. (2010). The bioethics of stem cell research and therapy. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 120(1), 71–75.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leta, J. (2012). Brazilian growth in the mainstream science: The role of human resources and national journals. Journal Scientometric Research, 1(1), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leydesdorff, L. (2007). Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1303–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Machado, R. N., & Leta, J. (2013). Trends of intellectual and cognitive structures of stem cell research: A study of Brazilian scientific. In: 14th international society for scientometrics and informetrics conference, 2013, Vienna. Proceedings of the ISSI 2013. Viena: Facultas Verlags-und Buchhandels AG, vol. 2, pp 1759–1771.Google Scholar
  19. Marshakova, I. V. (1973). A system of document connection based on references. Scientific and Technical Information Serial of VINITI, 6(2), 3–8.Google Scholar
  20. McCain, K. W. (1991). Mapping economics through the journal literature: An experiment in journal cocitation análysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(4), 290–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McLaren, A. (2001). Ethical and social considerations of stem cell research. Nature, 414, 129–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Morris, S. A., & Van der Veer Martens, B. (2008). Mapping research specialties. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 42(1), 213–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moya-Anegón, F., Vargas-Quesada, B., Herrero-Solana, V., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Corera-Álvarez, E., & Muñoz-Fernández, F. J. (2004). A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the cocitation of classes and categories. Scientometrics, 61(1), 129–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pranke, P., Chagastelles, P., & Sperling, L. E. (2014). The current state of research with human pluripotent stem cells in Brazil. Stem Cells and Development, 23(S1), 20–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rehen, S., & Paulsen, B. (2007). Células-tronco: o que são? Para que servem?. Rio de Janeiro: Vieira & Lente.Google Scholar
  27. Reuters, T. (2012). Science Citation Index expanded. Scope notes. Accessed on 21 October 2013.
  28. Ruiz, M. A. (2013). Cell therapy in Brazil: Time for reflection. Brazilian Journal of Hematology and Hemotherapy, 35(5), 296–298. doi:
  29. Santos, R. R., Soares, M. B. P., & Carvalho, A. C. C. (2004). Transplante de células da medula óssea no tratamento da cardiopatia chagásica crônica. Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, 37(6), 490–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Siqueira, R. C. (2009). Terapia celular nas doenças oftalmológicas. Revista Brasileira de Hematologia e Hemoterapia, 31(Supl. 1), 120–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Small, H. (1973). Cocitation in the scientific literature a new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Small, H., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures I: Identifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies, 4(1), 7–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2011). Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer. ISSI Newsletter, 7(3), 50–54.Google Scholar
  35. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2013). VOSviewer manual. Manual for VOSviewer version 1.5.5. dec.Google Scholar
  36. Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., Luwel, M., & Zimmermann, E. (2002). Measuring progress and evolution in science and technology—I: The multiple uses of bibliometric indicators. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. White, H., & Griffith, B. (1981). Author co-citation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32(3), 163–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2011). Intellectual structure of stem cell research: A comprehensive author co-citation analysis of a highly collaborative and multidisciplinary field. Scientometrics, 87(1), 115–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raymundo das Neves Machado
    • 1
  • Benjamín Vargas-Quesada
    • 2
  • Jacqueline Leta
    • 3
  1. 1.Instituto de Ciência da InformaçãoUniversidade Federal da BahiaSalvadorBrazil
  2. 2.SCImago Research Group, Facultad de Comunicación y DocumentaciónUniversidad de GranadaGranadaSpain
  3. 3.Instituto de Bioquímica Médica Leopoldo de MeisUniversidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations