Sectoral collaboration in biomedical research and development

Scientometrics

Volumn 94, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 343-357

  Lander, Bryn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Biomedicine; Networks; R D; Sectors

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871902786     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0776-8     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425-455.
2. Atkinson-Grosjean, J., & Douglas, C. (2010). The third mission and the laboratory: How translational science engages and serves the community. In P. Inman & H. G. Schuetze (Eds.), The community engagement and service mission of universities (pp. 309-323). Leicester: Naice.
3. Borgatti, S. P. (2002). NetDraw: Graph visualization software. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
4. Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1997). Network analysis of 2-mode data. Social Networks, 19(3), 243-269.
5. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET 6 for windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
6. Bourgeosi, F. T., Murthy, S., & Mandl, K. (2010). Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials. gov. Annals of Internal Medicine, 153(3), 158-166.
7. Burt, R. (1992). The social structure of competition. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organization: Structure, form and action (pp. 57-91). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
8. Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1973). Spatial autocorrelation. London: Pion.
9. Conti, N., & Doreian, P. (2010). Social network engineering and race in a police academy: A longitudinal analysis. Social Networks, 32, 30-43.
10. Cooke, P. (1998). Introduction: Origins of the concept. In H. Braczyk, P. Cooke, & M. Heidenreich (Eds.), Regional innovation systems (pp. 2-27). Reading: UCL Press.
11. Cross, R., Borgatti, S. P., & Parker, A. (2001). Beyond answers: Dimensions of the advice network. Social Networks, 23, 215-235.
12. Djellal, F., & Gallouj, F. (2005). Mapping innovation dynamics in hospitals. Research Policy, 34(6), 817-835.
13. Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11(3), 147-162.
14. Edquist, C. (2005). Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 181-208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Edquist, C., & Johnson, B. (1997). Institutions and organizations in systems of innovation. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovations: Technologies, institutions and organizations (pp. 41-63). London: Pinter Publishers.
16. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999). The future location of research and technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, 111-123.
17. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and 'mode 2' to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123.
18. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313-330.
19. Gelijns, A. C., Zivin, J. G., & Nelson, R. R. (2001). Uncertainty and technological change in medicine. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 25(5), 913-924.
20. Gilding, M. (2008). The tyranny of distance: Biotechnology networks and clusters in the antipodes. Research Policy, 37, 1132-1144.
21. Godin, B. (1996). Research and the practice of publication in industries. Research Policy, 25(4), 587-606.
22. Goes, J. B., & Park, S. H. (1997). Interorganizational links and innovation: The case of hospital services. The Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 673-696.
23. Gregersen, B. (1992). The public sector as a pacer in national systems of innovation. In B. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (pp. 129-145). London: Pinter Publishers.
24. Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside: University of California (published in digital form at http://faculty. ucr. edu/hanneman/).
25. Hansen, M. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
26. Hicks, D., & Katz, J. S. (1996). Hospitals: The hidden research system. Science and Public Policy, 23(5), 297-304.
27. Holbrook, J. A., & Clayman, B. P. (2006). Research funding by city: An indicator of regional technological competitiveness? Research Evaluation, 15(3), 221-231.
28. Hopkins, M. (2006). The hidden research system: The evolution of cytogenetic testing in the National Health Service. Science as Culture, 15(3), 253-276.
29. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1-18.
30. Lander, B., & Atkinson-Grosjean, J. (2011). Translational science and the hidden research system in universities and academic hospitals: A case study. Social Science and Medicine, 72, 537-544.
31. Lewison, G. (1999). The definition and calibration of biomedical subfields. Scientometrics, 46(3), 529-537.
32. Lundvall, B. (1992). Introduction. In B. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (pp. 1-16). London: Pinter.
33. Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral systems of innovation: Basic concepts. In F. Malerba (Ed.), Sectoral systems of innovation: Concepts, issues and analyses of six major sectors in Europe (pp. 9-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Malerba, F. (2005). Sectoral systems: How and why innovation differs across sectors. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 381-405). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. McFetridge, D. G. (1993). The Canadian system of industrial innovation. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 299-323). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. McGinn, T., Wyer, P. C., Newman, T. B., Keitz, S., Leipzig, R., & Guyatt, G. (2004). Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic). CAMJ, 23(11), 1369-1373.
37. McKelvey, M., Alm, H., & Riccaboni, M. (2003). Does co-location matter for formal knowledge collaboration in the Swedish biotechnology-pharmaceutical sector? Research Policy, 32, 483-501.
38. Meyer, M. (2002). Tracing knowledge flows in innovation systems. Scientometrics, 54(2), 193-212.
39. Montori, V. M., Wilcynski, N. L., Morgan, D., & Haynes, R. B. (2005). Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: Analytical survey. British Medical Journal, 330(7482), 68-71.
40. Morlacchi, P., Wilkinson, I. F., & Young, L. C. (2005). Social networks of researchers in B2B marketing: A case study of the IMP group 1984-1999. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 12(1), 3-34.
41. Murphy, K., Travers, P., & Walport, M. (2008). Janeway's immunobiology (7th ed.). New York: Garland Science, Taylor and Francis Group.
42. Murray, F. (2002). Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: Exploring tissue engineering. Research Policy, 31, 1389-1403.
43. Nelson, R. R., & Rosenberg, N. (1993). Technical innovation and national systems. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 3-22). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44. Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. PNAS, 2, 404-409.
45. OECD. (1997). National innovation systems. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
46. OECD. (1999). Managing national innovation systems. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
47. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science, 15(1), 5-21.
48. Rees, K. (2005). Interregional collaboration and innovation in Vancouver's emerging high tech cluster. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 96(3), 298-312.
49. Salazar, M., Bliemel, M. J., & Holbrook, J. A. (2008). A comparison of R& D indicators for the Vancouver biotechnology cluster. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 14(3), 233-246.
50. Sandstrom, A., Pettersson, I., & Nilsson, A. (2000). Knowledge production and knowledge flows in the Swedish biotechnology innovation system. Scientometrics, 48(2), 179-201.
51. Sharif, N. (2006). Emergence and development of the national innovation systems concept. Research Policy, 35, 745-766.
52. Snijders, T. A. B., & Borgatti, S. P. (1999). Non-parametric standard errors and tests for network statistics. Connections, 22(2), 161-170.
53. Sun, Y., & Negishi, M. (2010). Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan's national innovation system: A comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators. Scientometrics, 82(3), 677-685.
54. Swan, J., Goussevskaia, A., Newell, S., Robertson, M., Bresnen, M., & Obembe, A. (2007). Modes of organizing biomedical innovation in the UK and US and the role of integrative and relational capabilities. Research Policy, 36, 529-547.
55. Thune, T. (2007). University-industry collaboration: The network embeddedness approach. Science and Public Policy, 34(3), 158-168.
56. Uzzi, B. (1997). The social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 35-67.
57. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and application. New York: Cambridge University Press.
58. Windrum, P., & Garcia-Goni, M. (2008). A neo-Schumpeterian model of health services innovation. Research Policy, 37, 649-672.