Evolution of the research collaboration network in a productive department

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 195-201

  Katerndahl, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

Author keywords

Complex adaptive systems; Cooperative behaviour; Family practice; Interprofessional relations; Research; Social networks

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COOPERATION; GENERAL PRACTICE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RESEARCH; SOCIAL NETWORK;

COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPROFESSIONAL RELATIONS; MALE; ORGANIZATIONAL CASE STUDIES; RESEARCH; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TEXAS;

EID: 84855558871     PISSN: 13561294     EISSN: 13652753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01791.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Yousefi-Nooraie, R., Akbari-Kamrani, M., Hanneman, R. A. &Etemadi, A. (2008) Association between co-authorship network and scientific productivity and impact indicators in academic medical research centers. Health Research Policy and Systems/BioMed Central, 6, 9. DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-6-9.
2. Newman, M. E. J. (2001) Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E, 64, 1-8.
3. Leydesdorff, L. & Wagner, C. S. (2008) International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Journal of Informetrics, 2 (4), 317-325.
4. Cardillo, A., Scellato, S. & Latora, V. (2006) Topological analysis of scientific coauthorship networks. Physica A, 372, 333-339. (Pubitemid 44585162)
5. Butts, C. T. (2009) Revisiting the foundations of network analysis. Science, 325, 414-416.
6. Stutzbach, D. & Rejaie, R. (2006) Understanding churn in peer-to-peer networks. Presented at the ACM SIGCOMM meeting, Pisa, Italy, 12-15 September 2006.
7. Bales, M. E., Johnson, S. B. & Weng, C. (2008) Social network analysis of interdisciplinarity in obesity research. Paper presented at the American Medical Informatics Association Annual Symposium, Washington, DC, 8-12 November 2008.
8. Cheatham, M. & Cleereman, K. (2006) Application of social network analysis to collaborative team formation. IEEE Xplore. DOI: 10.1109/CTS.2006.18.
9. Katerndahl, D. (1996) Associations between departmental features and departmental scholarly activity. Family Medicine, 28, 119-127.
10. Hara, N., Solomon, P., Kim, S. L. & Sonnenwald, D. H. (2003) Emerging view of scientific collaboration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54 (10), 952-965.
11. Newman, M. E. J. (2004) Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101 (Suppl. 1), 5200-5205.
12. Fafchamps, M., van der Leij, M. J. & Goyal, S. (2006) Scientific Networks and Co-Authorship. Oxford: University of Oxford. ISSN 1471-0498, Number 256.
13. Barabasi, A. L. (2003) Linked. New York: Penguin Group.
14. Newman, M. E. J. (2001) Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review E, 64, 1-7.
15. Holme, P., Kim, B. J., Yoon, C. N. & Han, S. K. (2002) Attack vulnerability of complex networks. Physical Review E, 65, 1-15.
16. Van de Bunt, G. G., van Duijn, M. A. J. & Snijders, T. A. B. (1999) Friendship networks through time. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 5 (2), 167-192.
17. Katerndahl, D. (2006) Directing Research in Primary Care. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing.
18. Spalter-Roth, R. M., Fortenberry, N. L. & Lovitts, B. (2007) Acceptance and Diffusion of Innovation. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.
19. Collins, B. A. (1993) Review and integration of knowledge about faculty research productivity. Journal of Professional Nursing, 9 (3), 159-168.
20. Newman, M. E. J. (2004) Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks. In Complex Networks (eds E. Ben-Naim, H. Frauenfelder & Z. Toroczkai), pp. 1-17. Berlin: Springer.