Collaborative patterns, authorship practices and scientific success in biomedical research: a network analysis

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine

Volumn 112, Issue 6, 2019, Pages 245-257

  Patel, Vanash M ^a   Panzarasa, Pietro ^b   Ashrafian, Hutan ^a   Evans, Tim S ^a   Kirresh, Ali ^a   Sevdalis, Nick ^a   Darzi, Ara ^a   Athanasiou, Thanos ^a  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Medical careers; medical education; medical management

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CAREER; EMPLOYMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PUBLICATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SCIENTIST; UNITED KINGDOM; WITNESS; WRITING; COOPERATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

AUTHORSHIP; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; PUBLICATIONS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 85067012068     PISSN: 01410768     EISSN: 17581095     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0141076819851666     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Newman MEJ. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 404–409.
2. Wuchty S, Jones BF, Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 2007; 316: 1036–1039.
3. Yousefi-Nooraie R, Akbari-Kamrani M, Hanneman RA, Etemadi A. Association between co-authorship network and scientific productivity and impact indicators in academic medical research centers: a case study in Iran. Health Res Policy Syst 2008; 6: 9.
4. Ashrafian H, Rao C, Darzi A, Athanasiou T. Benchmarking in surgical research. Lancet 2009; 374: 1045–1047.
5. Patel VM, Ashrafian H, Ahmed K, Arora S, Jiwan S, Nicholson J, How has healthcare research performance been assessed? – a systematic review. J R Soc Med 2011; 104: 251–261.
6. Editorial. Games people play with authors' names. Nature 1997; 387: 831.
7. Greene M. The demise of the lone author. Nature 2007; 450: 1165.
8. Stallings J, Vance E, Yang J, Vannier MW, Liang J, Pang L, Determining scientific impact using a collaboration index. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013; 110: 9680–9685.
9. Stubbs C. The serious business of listing authors. Nature 1997; 388: 320.
10. Frandsen TF, Nicolaisen J. What is in a name? Credit assignment practices in different disciplines. J Inf 2010; 4: 608–617.
11. Kosmulski M. The order in the lists of authors in multi-author papers revisited. J Inf 2012; 6: 639–644.
12. Rennie D, Yank V, Emanuel L. When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA 1997; 278: 579–585.
13. Shapiro DW, Wenger NS, Shapiro MF. The contributions of authors to multiauthored biomedical research papers. JAMA 1994; 271: 438–442.
14. Baerlocher MO, Newton M, Gautam T, Tomlinson G, Detsky AS. The meaning of author order in medical research. J Investig Med 2010; 55: 174–180.
15. Wislar JS, Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, Deangelis CD. Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey. BMJ 2011; 343: d6128.
16. Akhabue E, Lautenbach E. “Equal” contributions and credit: an emerging trend in the characterization of authorship. Ann Epidemiol 2010; 20: 868–871.
17. Levitt JM, Thelwall M. Alphabetization and the skewing of first authorship towards last names early in the alphabet. J Inf 2013; 7: 575–582.
18. Waltman L. An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing. J Inf 2012; 6: 700–711.
19. Allen L, Scott J, Brand A, Hlava M, Altman M. Publishing: credit where credit is due. Nature 2014; 508: 312–313.
20. Hodge SE, Greenberg DA. Publication credit. Science 1981; 213: 950–952.
21. Kennedy D. Multiple authors, multiple problems. Science 2003; 301: 733.
22. Sekercioglu CH. Quantifying coauthor contributions. Science 2008; 322: 371.
23. Shen HW, Barabási AL. Collective credit allocation in science. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2014; 111: 12325–12330.
24. Newman MEJ. Networks: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010
25. Watts DJ, Strogatz SH. Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 1988; 393: 440–442.
26. Burt RS. Structural Holes. The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
27. Patel VM, Ashrafian H, Bornmann L, Mutz R, Makanjuola J, Skapinakis P, Enhancing the h index for the objective assessment of healthcare researcher performance and impact. J R Soc Med 2013; 106: 19–29.
28. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine and Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006.
29. Elsevier. Scopus Website. See http://www.scopus.com (last checked 2 May 2019).
30. Levitt JM. What is the optimal number of researchers for social science research? Scientometrics 2014; 102: 213–225.
31. Radicchi F, Fortunato S, Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105: 17268–17272.
32. Ali SN, Young HC, Ali NM. Determining the quality of publications and research for tenure or promotion decisions: a preliminary checklist to assist. Libr Review 1996; 45: 39–53.
33. Brandes U and Wagner D. Visone—analysis and visualization of social networks. In: Jünger M, Mutzel P, eds. Graph Drawing Software. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2004:321–340
34. Wasserman S and Faust K. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
35. Bonacich PF. Power and centrality: a family of measures. Am J Sociol 1987; 92: 1170–1182.
36. Freeman LC. A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness. Sociometry 1977; 40: 35–41.
37. Jaccard J, Turrisi R and Wan C. Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, 1990.
38. Cameron AC and Trivedi PK. Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
39. Cameron AC and Trivedi PK. Regression Analysis of Count Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
40. Guerrero-Medina G, Feliú-Mójer M, González-Espada W, Díaz-Muñoz G, López M, Díaz-Muñoz S, Supporting diversity in science through social networking. PLoS Biol 2013; 11: e1001740.
41. Jagsi R, Guancial EA, Worobey CC, Henault LE, Chang Y, Starr R, The “gender gap” in authorship of academic medical literature – a 35-year perspective. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 281–287.
42. Patel VM, Ashrafian H, Almoudaris A, Makanjuola J, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Darzi A, Measuring academic performance for healthcare researchers with the H index: which search tool should be used? Med Princ Pract 2013; 22: 178–183.
43. Martin-Martin A, Orduna-Malea E, Thewall M, Lopez-Cozar E. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. J Inf 2018; 12: 1160–1177.
44. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 1997; 314: 498–502.
45. Sheridan DJ. Reversing the decline of academic medicine in Europe. Lancet 2006; 367: 1698–1701.
46. Atasoylu AA, Wright SM, Beasley BW, Cofrancesco J Jr, Macpherson DS, Partridge T, Promotion criteria for clinician-educators. J Gen Intern Med 2003; 18: 711–716.
47. Lee S, Bozeman B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc Stud Sci 2005; 35: 673–702.
48. Cohen J, Siegel E. Academic medical centers and medical research: the challenges ahead. JAMA 2005; 294: 1367–1372.
49. Al-Herz W, Haider H, Al-Bahhar M, Sadeq A. Honorary authorship in biomedical journals: how common is it and why does it exist? J Med Ethics 2014; 40: 346–348.