A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective

Scientometrics

Volumn 94, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 333-342

  Bajwa, R S ^a   Yaldram, K ^a   Rafique, S ^b  

^a Preston Institute of Nanoscience and Technology (PINSAT)   (Pakistan)

^b KING ABDULAZIZ UNIVERSITY   (Saudi Arabia)

Author keywords

Bibliometric; Degree of collaboration; Nanoscience; Nanotechnology; Relative growth rate

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871924036     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0699-4     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Ajiferuke, I., Burell, Q., et al. (1988). Collaborative coefficient: A single measure of the degree of collaboration in research. Scientometrics, 14(5), 421-433.
2. Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., et al. (2010). hg-index: A new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h-and g-indices. Scientometrics, 82(2), 391-400.
3. Bajwa, R. S., & Yaldram, K. (2012). Research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan scenario. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 14(2), 1-6.
4. Braun, T., Schubert, A., & Zsindely, S. (1997). Nanoscience and nanotechnology on the balance. Scientometrics, 38(2), 321-325.
5. Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.
6. Feynman, R. P. (1960). There's plenty of room at the bottom. Engineering and Science, 23(5), 22-36.
7. Gupta, V. K. (2009). Indian publications output in nanotechnology during 1990-2008. Advanced Science Letters, 2(3), 402-404.
8. HEC (2010). http://www. hec. gov. pk/MediaPublication/PressReleases/Pages/HEC%20Scholarships%20%20%20%20The%20best%20Investment%20in%20Pakistan%E2%80%99s%20Future%20%2821-03-2011%29. aspx.
9. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569.
10. Kaiser, H. (2009). http://www. hkc22. com/nanobasedproducts. html.
11. Karpagam, R., Gopalakrishnan, S., Natarajan, M., & Ramesh Babu, B. (2011) Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990-2009. Scientometrics, 89, 501-522.
12. Lawani, S. M. (1980). Quality, collaboration and citations in cancer research: A 268 bibliometric study. Ph. D. dissertation, Florida State University.
13. Liu, X., Zhang, P., et al. (2009). Trends for nanotechnology development in China, Russia, and India. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 11(8), 1845-1866.
14. Mahapatra, M. (1985). On the validity of the theory of exponential growth of scientific literature. Proceedings of the 15thIASLIC conference, Bangalore (pp. 61-70). Bangalore.
15. PINSAT (2010). http://www. pinsat-idrc. org/conceptual%20framework. html.
16. Prathap, G. (2010). The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index. Scientometrics, 84(1), 167-172.
17. Research, L. (2010). http://www. luxresearchinc. com/blog/2010/02/the-recessions-impact-on-nanotechnology/.
18. Roco, M. C. (2011). The long view of nanotechnology development: The national nanotechnology initiative at 10 years. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 13, 427-445.
19. Savanur, K., & Srikanth, R. (2010). Modified collaborative coefficient: A new measure for quantifying the degree of research collaboration. Scientometrics, 84(2), 365-371.
20. Shahid, M. (2010, Dec, 6-9). S& T indicators of Pakistan a country report 2010 south Asian regional workshop on STI indicators Kathmandu, Nepal.
21. Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of information Science, 6(1), 33-38.
22. Tang, L., & Shapira, P. (2010). Regional development and interregional collaboration in the growth of nanotechnology research in China. Scientometrics, 86(2), 299-315.