, Volume 109, Issue 1, pp 121–141 | Cite as

Neurosciences in Brazil: a bibliometric study of main characteristics, collaboration and citations

  • Natascha Helena Franz HoppenEmail author
  • Samile Andréa de Souza Vanz


Brazilian scientific output in the field of Neurosciences is analyzed based on articles indexed in Web of Science from 2006 to 2013 according to bibliometric indicators of production, collaboration, impact and keywords analysis. The growth rate of Brazilian scientific output is greater than global scientific production in the area, with a higher percentage of articles in English than other research areas in Brazil and Brazilian neuroscientists preferring to publish their work in foreign journals. However, Portuguese papers were also observed in domestic journals in connection mainly to one research focus—Psychiatry. Modes of production in the area are also transdisciplinary when analyzed within the scope of research topics, which branch into issues related to basic and experimental research as well as clinical research. In addition, the Brazilian Neurosciences output is highly concentrated to a small number of authors, regions, and particularly institutions, with most output coming from public universities in the southeastern and southern states. However, there is greater participation by the private sector than in other fields of knowledge (mainly private universities and hospitals). Interinstitutional collaboration occurs in 60.79 % and international collaboration in 29.40 %. Brazil’s main partners in international collaboration are the USA, Colombia, Argentina and the UK. With regard to citations, journals that most cite Brazilian Neurosciences are US, English and English-language Dutch publications, but the citing authors are linked to institutions on all continents of the world. It concludes that global reach and accelerated productivity growth does not translate into excellent impact. Thus, it is suggested to conduct further studies to determine why research is scarce in the northern and northeastern states.


Brazil Brazilian science Scientific production Neurosciences research Research assessment Collaboration analysis Citation analysis 

Mathematics Subject Classification

62-07 62Hxx 

JEL Classification




The authors would like to thank Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for funding the survey.


  1. Almeida, E. C. E., & Guimarães, J. A. (2013). Brazil’s growing production of scientific articles—How are we doing with review articles and other qualitative indicators? Scientometrics, 97(2), 287–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria. (n.d.). Sobre nós. São Paulo: Associação Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria. Retrieved from:
  3. Ashrafi, F., Mohammadhassanzadeh, H., Shokraneh, F., Valinejadi, A., Johari, K., Saemi, N., et al. (2012). Iranian’s contribution to world literature on neuroscience. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 29, 323–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bacheschi, L. A., & Guerreiro, C. A. M. (2004). Situação das neurociências no Brasil: Neurociências clínicas. Ciência e Cultura, 56(1), 25.Google Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. (2004). Os usos sociais da ciência: por uma sociologia clínica do campo científico. São Paulo: UNESP.Google Scholar
  6. Casani, F., Filippo, D., García-Zorita, C., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2014). Public versus private universities: Assessment of research performance; case study of the Spanish university system. Research Evaluation, 23(1), 48–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dorta-Contreras, A. J., Arencibia-Jorge, R., Martí-Lahera, Y., & Araujo-Ruiz, J. A. (2008). Productividad y visibilildad de lós neurocientíficos cubanos. Revista de Neurología, 47(7), 355–360.Google Scholar
  8. Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. (n.d.). Dicionário Histórico-Biográfico das Ciências da Saúde no Brasil (18321930). Retrieved from:
  9. Garfield, E. (1990). KeyWords Plus: ISI’s breakthrough retrieval method. Part I. Expanding your searching power on Current Contents on Diskette. Current Contents, 32, 5–9.Google Scholar
  10. Garfield, E., & Sher, I. (1993). KeyWords Plus: Algorithmic derivative indexing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44(5), 298–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glänzel, W. (2003). Bibliometrics as a research field: A course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators. Retrieved from:
  12. Glänzel, W., Dannel, R., & Persson, O. (2003). The decline of Swedish neuroscience: Decomposing a bibliometric national science indicator. Scientometrics, 57(2), 197–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glänzel, W., Leta, J., & Thijs, B. (2006). Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study. Scientometrics, 67(1), 67–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haustein, S., Cótê, G., & Beaudet, A. (2013). State of knowledge production in Neuroscience in Alberta: A bibliometric assessment. Montréal: Science-Metrix.Google Scholar
  15. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2014c). Tabela de códigos de áreas. Retrieved from:
  16. Journal Citation Reports. (2015c). 2014 JCR Science Edition. New York: Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
  17. Leta, J. (2012). Brazilian growth in the mainstream science: The role of human resources and national journals. Journal of Scientometric Research, 1(1), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leta, J., & Chaimovich, H. (2002). Recognition and international collaboration: The Brazilian case. Scientometrics, 53(3), 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leta, J., & Cruz, C. H. B. (2003). A produção científica brasileira. In E. B. Viotti & M. M. Macedo (Eds.), Indicadores de ciência, tecnologia e inovação no Brasil (pp. 123–168). Campinas: Unicamp.Google Scholar
  20. Leta, J., Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2006). Science in Brazil. Part 2: Sectorial and institutional research profiles. Scientometrics, 67(1), 87–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leta, J., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2013). A macro-level study of science in Brazil: Seven years later. Encontros Bibli, 18(36), 51–66.Google Scholar
  22. Library of Congress. (2000). The decade of the brain. Washington: LOC. Retrieved from:
  23. Luukkonen, T., Tijssen, R., Persson, O., & Sivertsen, G. (1993). The measurement of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 28(1), 15–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meadows, A. J. (1999). A comunicação científica. Brasília: Briquet de Lemos.Google Scholar
  25. Meneghini, R. (1996). The key role of collaborative work in the growth of Brazilian science in the last ten years. Scientometrics, 35(3), 367–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Myskiw, J., & Yano, C. (2012). Memórias de um brasileiro de Buenos Aires. Ciência Hoje, 50(297), 64–71.Google Scholar
  27. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria. (2014). Instructions to authors. São Paulo: Associação Brasileira de Psiquiatria. Retrieved from:
  28. Revista de Psiquiatria Clínica. (2014). Announcements. São Paulo: USP. Retrieved from:
  29. Rousseau, R. (1998). Indicadores bibliométricos e econométricos para a avaliação de instituições científicas. Ciência da Informação, 27(2), 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shahabudin, S. M. (2013). Mapping neuroscience research in India: A bibliometric approach. Current Science, 104(12), 1619–1626.Google Scholar
  31. Timo-Iaria, C. (n.d.). História da neurofisiologia no Brasil. Retrieved from:
  32. United Nations. (2013). Countries or areas, codes and abbreviations. Genova: United Nations. Retrieved from:
  33. Vanz, S. A. S., & Caregnato, S. E. (2003). Estudos de citação: uma ferramenta para entender a comunicação científica. Em Questão, 9(2), 295–307.Google Scholar
  34. Ventura, D. F. (2004). Situação das neurociências no Brasil: disciplinas básicas. Ciência e Cultura, 56(1), 25–26.Google Scholar
  35. Ventura, D. F. (2010). Um retrato da área de Neurociência e Comportamento no Brasil. Psicologia: teoria e pesquisa, 26, 123–129.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. World Health Organization. (2001). The world health report. Mental health, new understanding, new hope. Geneva: WHO. Retrieved from:
  37. Xu, W., Chen, Y., & Shen, Z. (2003). Neuroscience output of China: A medline-based bibliometric study. Scientometrics, 57(3), 399–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre (Brazil)Porto AlegreBrazil

Personalised recommendations