Acknowledged: Analysing the bibliometric presence of the Multiple Sclerosis Society

Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives

Volumn 57, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 247-260

  Rangnekar, Dwijen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Aid agencies; Disabled people; Financing; Publications; Quantitative methods; United Kingdom

Indexed keywords

AID AGENCIES; EVOLUTIONARY ECONOMICS; PUBLICATIONS; UNITED KINGDOM;

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; ENGINEERING RESEARCH; FINANCE; HANDICAPPED PERSONS; KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION; PATIENT TREATMENT; PUBLIC POLICY;

BIBLIOGRAPHIC RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS;

EID: 33749485048     PISSN: 0001253X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/00012530510599208     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Alzheimer's Society (2000), Appraisal of the Drugs for Alzheimer's Disease: Submission to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), Alzheimer's Society, London.
2. Anglin, M.K. (1997), "Working from the inside out: implications of breast cancer activism for biomedical policies and practices", Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 44 No. 9, pp. 1403-15.
3. Arrow, K.J. (1971), "Political and economic valuation of social effects and externalities", in Intriligator, M. (Ed.), Frontiers of Quantitative Economics, North-Holland Publishing Co., Oxford and Amsterdam, pp. 71-109.
4. Boor, M. (1982), "The citation impact factor - another dubious index of journal quality?", American Psychologist, Vol. 37 No. 8, pp. 975-7.
5. Braun, D. (1998), "The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science", Research Policy, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 807-21.
6. Brooks, H. (1994), "The relationship between science and technology", Research Policy, Vol. 23, pp. 477-86.
7. Bureau of Industry Economics (1996), Australian Science - Performance from Published Papers, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
8. Callon, M. (2001), "Economy of qualities, researchers in the wild and the rise of technical democracy", available at: www.cts.cni.cz/seminar/ callon.htm (accessed 1 February 2004).
9. Chalmers, I. (1995), "What do I want from health research and researchers when I am a patient?", BMJ, Vol. 310 No. 6990, pp. 1315-18.
10. Cockburn, I.M. and Henderson, R.M. (1998), "Absorptive capacity, co-authoring behaviour, and the organization of research in drug discovery", Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 157-82.
11. Davis, G. and Royle, P. (1996), "A comparison of Australian university output using journal impact factors", Scientometrics, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 45-58.
12. Dawson, G., Lucocq, B., Cottrell, R. and Lewison, G. (1998), Mapping the Landscape: National Biomedical Research Outputs, 1988-1995, Vol. 9, The Wellcome Trust, London.
13. Department of Health (2000), The Expert Patient: A New Approach to Chronic Disease Management for the 21st Century, Department of Health, London.
14. Department of Trade and Industry and the Office of Science and Technology (2001), SET Statistics, HMSO, London.
15. Duckenfield, M. (2004), "Patient groups: major players, niche players and outsiders", The Rise of Patient Groups and Drug Development: Towards a Science of Patient Involvement, University College London, London, pp. 7-14.
16. Entwistle, V.A., Sheldon, T.A., Sowden, A. and Watt, I.S. (1998), "Evidence-informed patient choice - practical issues of involving patients in decisions about health-care technologies", International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 212-25.
17. Epstein, S. (1995), "The construction of lay expertise - Aids, activism and the forging of credibility in the reform of clinical trials", Science Technology & Human Values, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 408-37.
18. Epstein, S. (1996), Impure Science: Aids, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge, University of California Press Ltd, Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA.
19. European Commission (2003), 3rd European Report on Science and Technology Indicators - Towards a Knowledge-based Economy, European Commission, Brussels.
20. Garfield, E. (1972), "Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation", Science, Vol. 178 No. 4060, pp. 471-9.
21. Garfield, E. (1998), "Long-term vs short-term journal impact: does it matter?", The Scientist, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 11-12.
22. Garnham, D. (2000), "The charity sector and the health-care agenda", keynote address to the Royal College of Nursing's Research Society Annual Conference, 13-15 April, Sheffield, available at: www.man.ac.uk/rcn/ research2000/dgarnham.htm.
23. Glänzel, W. and Moed, H.F. (2002), "Journal impact measures in bibliometric research", Scientometrics, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 171-93.
24. Grant, J., Cottrell, R., Cluzeau, F. and Fawcett, G. (2000), "Evaluating 'payback' on biomedical research from papers cited in clinical guidelines: applied bibliometric study", BMJ, Vol. 320 No. 7242, pp. 1107-11.
25. Gross, C.P., Anderson, G.F. and Rowe, N.R. (1999), "The relation between funding by the National Institutes of Health and the burden of disease", New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 340 No. 24, pp. 1881-7.
26. Hanley, B., Truesdale, A., King, A., Elbourne, D. and Chalmers, I. (2001), "Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey", BMJ, Vol. 322 No. 7285, pp. 519-23.
27. Hicks, D. (1995), "Published papers, tacit competencies and corporate management of the public/private character of knowledge", Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 401-24.
28. Hicks, D. and Katz, J.S. (1997), "The British industrial research system", working paper, SPRU, University of Sussex, Brighton.
29. Hicks, D., Kroll, P., Narin, F., Thomas, P., Ruegg, R., Tomizawa, H., Saitoh, Y. and Shinichi Kobayashi, S. (2002), "Quantitative methods of research evaluation used by the US Federal Government", NISTEP Study Material, No. 86, Second Theory-Oriented Research Group, National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP), Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan.
30. Klawiter, M. (1999), "Racing for the cure, walking women, and toxic touring: mapping cultures of action within the Bay Area terrain of breast cancer", Social Problems, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 104-26.
31. Lewison, G. (2002), "Researchers' and users' perceptions of the relative standing of biomedical papers in different journals", Scientometrics, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 229-40.
32. Lewison, G. and Devey, M.E. (1999), "Bibliometric methods for the evaluation of arthritis research", Rheumatology, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 13-20.
33. Leydersdorff, L. (1998), "Theories of citation?", Scientometrics, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 5-25.
34. McMillan, G.S., Narin, F. and Deeds, D.L. (2000), "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology", Research Policy, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 1-8.
35. Mansfield, E. (1991), "Academic research and industrial innovation", Research Policy, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
36. Mansfield, E. (1995), "Academic research underlying industrial innovations - sources, characteristics and financing", Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 55-62.
37. Moed, H.F. and van Leeuwen, T.N. (1996), "The impact factors can mislead", Nature, Vol. 381 No. 186, p. 186.
38. Moed, H.F., van Leeuwen, T.N. and Reedijk, J. (1996), "A critical analysis of the journal impact factors of Angewandte Chemie and the Journal of the American Chemical Society - the inaccuracies in published impact factors based on overall citations only", Scientometrics, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 105-15.
39. Narin, F., Hamilton, K.S. and Olivastro, D. (1997), "The increasing linkage between US technology and public science", Research Policy, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 317-30.
40. National Science Foundation (2000), Science and Engineering Indicators 2000, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.
41. Pavitt, K. (1998), "The social shaping of the national science base", Research Policy, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 793-805.
42. Penan, H. (1996), "R&D strategy in a techno-economic network: Alzheimer's disease therapeutic strategies", Research Policy, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 337-58.
43. Pinski, G. and Narin, F. (1976), "Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications", Information Processing and Management, Vol. 12, pp. 297-312.
44. Rabeharisoa, V. and Callon, M. (1998), "The participation of patients in the process of production of knowledge: the case of the French Muscular Dystrophies Association", Sciences Sociales et Santé, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 41-65.
45. Rabeharisoa, V. and Callon, M. (2000a), "Patients' associations and research. I. From self-help groups to patients' associations", Médecine Sciences, Vol. 16 Nos. 8/9, pp. 945-9.
46. Rabeharisoa, V. and Callon, M. (2000b), "Patients' associations and research. II. Modalities of patients' associations' involvement in research activities in France", Medecine Sciences, Vol. 16 No. 11, pp. 1225-31.
47. Rangnekar, D. (2004a), "Patient groups and the funding of biomedical research", The Rise of Patient Groups and Drug Development: Towards a Science of Patient Involvement, University College London, London, pp. 15-27.
48. Rangnekar, D. (2004b), "Patient groups and clinical trials", The Rise of Patient Groups and Drug Development: Towards a Science of Patient Involvement, University College London, London, pp. 29-35.
49. Salter, A.J. and Martin, B.R. (2001), "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review", Research Policy, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 509-32.
50. Seglen, P.O. (1992), "The skewness of science", Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 43 No. 9, pp. 628-38.
51. Tallon, D., Chard, J. and Dieppe, P. (2000), "Relation between agendas of the research community and the research consumer", The Lancet, Vol. 355 No. 9220, pp. 2037-40.
52. Wood, B. (2000), Patient Power? The Politics of Patients' Associations in Britain and America, Open University Press, Buckingham.
53. Seglen, P.O. (1997), "Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research", BMJ, Vol. 314 No. 7079, pp. 498-502.