The effect of funding on the outputs of biomedical research

Scientometrics

Volumn 41, Issue 1-2, 1998, Pages 17-27

  Lewison, G ^a   Dawson, G ^a  

^a WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002436949     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02457963     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. ANDERSON J. (1989), The evaluation of research training. In: D.C. Evered, S Harnett (Eds), The Evaluation of Scientific Research, 93-119, Wiley, Chichester.
2. ANDERSON J., MACLEAN M., DAVIES C. (1996), Malaria Research: An Audit of International Activity, PRISM report no 7 (ISBN 1 869835 68 9), The Wellcome Trust, London.
3. BRAUN T., GLÄNZEL W., GRUPP H. (1995), The scientometric weight of 50 nations in 27 science areas, 1989-93. Part II Life Sciences, Scientometrics, 34: 207-237.
4. COLLINS P.M.D. (1991), Quantitative Assessment of Departmental Research, SEPSU Policy Study no 5, The Royal Society, London.
5. HIGGINS C. et al. (1996), BBSRC Review of Structural Biology, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Swindon.
6. JESCHIN D., LEWISON G., ANDERSON J. (1995), A bibliometric database for tracking acknowledgements of research funding, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, 235-244. Learned Information Inc, Medford NJ.
7. LEWISON G., CUNNINGHAM P. (1989), The use of bibliometrics in the evaluation of Community biotechnology research programmes, Select Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Science and Technology Indicators, 99-114. DSWO Press, Leiden.
8. LEWISON G., DAWSON G., ANDERSON J. (1995), The behaviour of biomedical scientific authors in acknowledging their funding sources, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, 255-264. Learned Information Inc, Medford NJ.
9. LEWISON G. (1996), The definition of biomedical research subfields with title keywords and application to the analysis of research outputs, Research Evaluation, 6: 25-36.
10. LEWISON G., DAWSON G., ANDERSON J. (1997), Support for UK biomedical research from tobacco industry. The Lancet, 349: 778.
11. LEWISON G. (1998), New bibliometric techniques for the evaluation of medical schools, Scientometrics, 41: 5-16.
12. MACLEAN M., DAVIES C., LEWISON G., ANDERSON J. (1997), Evaluating research activity and impact at the level of the funding body, submitted to Research Evaluation, in press.
13. MAGNIEN E., AGUILAR A., WRAGG P., DE NETTANCOURT D. (1989), Laboratoires Européens sans murs (European Laboratories Without Walls). Biofutur, 17 November, 17-30.
14. MAY R. (1997), The scientific wealth of nations, Science, 275: 793-796.
15. MOED H. F., VAN LEEUWEN T.N. (1996), Impact factors can mislead, Nature, 381: 186.
16. NARIN F., PINSKI G., GEE H.H. (1976), Structure of the biomedical literature, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 27: 25-45.
17. NARIN F., STEVENS K., WHITLOW E.S. (1991), Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers, Scientometrics, 21: 313-324.
18. NARIN F. (1994), Patent bibliometrics, Scientometrics, 30: 147-155.
19. SEGLEN P.O. (1997), Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research, BMJ, 314: 498-502.