Research and Collaboration Overview of Institut Pasteur International Network: A Bibliometric Approach toward Research Funding Decisions

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Epidemiology, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran

2 Research Center for Modeling in Health, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

Abstract

Background Institut Pasteur International Network (IPIN), which includes 32 research institutes around the world, is a network of research and expertise to fight against infectious diseases. A scientometric approach was applied to describe research and collaboration activities of IPIN.   Methods Publications were identified using a manual search of IPIN member addresses in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) between 2006 and 2011. Total publications were then subcategorized by geographic regions. Several scientometric indicators and the H-index were employed to estimate the scientific production of each IPIN member. Subject and geographical overlay maps were also applied to visualize the network activities of the IPIN members.   Results A total number of 12667 publications originated from IPIN members. Each author produced an average number of 2.18 papers and each publication received an average of 13.40 citations. European Pasteur Institutes had the largest amount of publications, authored papers, and H-index values. Biochemistry and molecular biology, microbiology, immunology and infectious diseases were the most important research topics, respectively. Geographic mapping of IPIN publications showed wide international collaboration among IPIN members around the world.   Conclusion IPIN has strong ties with national and international authorities and organizations to investigate the current and future health issues. It is recommended to use scientometric and collaboration indicators as measures of research performance in IPIN future policies and investment decisions.

Keywords

Main Subjects


 

1. Chene G, Sterne JA, May M, Costagliola D, Ledergerber B, Phillips AN, et al. Prognostic importance of initial response in HIV-1 infected patients starting potent antiretroviral therapy: analysis of prospective studies. Lancet 2003; 362: 679–86. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(03)14229-8

2. Cartwright K. Pneumococcal disease in western Europe: burden of disease, antibiotic resistance and management. Eur J Pediatr 2002; 161: 188–95. doi: 10.1007/s00431-001-0907-3

3. Velati C, Fomiatti L, Baruffi L, Romano L, Zanetti A. Impact of nucleic acid amplification technology (NAT) in Italy in the three years following implementation (2001-2003). Euro Surveill 2005; 10: 12–4.

4. Durando P, Sticchi L, Sasso L, Gasparini R. Public health research literature on infectious diseases: coverage and gaps in Europe. Eur J Public Health 2007; 17: 19–23. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckm066

5. Center for Strategic and International Studies. Infectious Diseases: a presistent threat [internet]. 2013. [cited 2013 Mar 27]. Available from: http://www.smartglobalhealth.org/issues/entry/infectious-diseases

6. World Health Organization (WHO). The top 10 cuases of death: World Health Organization [internet]. 2008. [cited 2013 Mar 27]. Available from: http://who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/

7. Donald PR, van Helden PD. The global burden of tuberculosis--combating drug resistance in difficult times. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 2393–5. doi: 10.1056/nejmp0903806

8. Richet HM, Mohammed J, McDonald LC, Jarvis WR. Building communication networks: international network for the study and prevention of emerging antimicrobial resistance. Emerg Infect Dis 2001; 7: 319. doi: 10.3201/eid0702.010235

9. Ahmed J, Bouloy M, Ergonul O, Fooks A, Paweska J, Chevalier V, et al. International network for capacity building for the control of emerging viral vector-borne zoonotic diseases: ARBO-ZOONET. Euro Surveill 2009; 14: 19160.

10. Moulin A. Patriarchal Science: The Network of the Overseas Pasteur Institutes. In: Petitjean P, Jami C, Moulin A, editors. Science and Empires. Netherlands: Springer; 1992. p. 307–22. doi: 10.1007/978-94-011-2594-9_31

11. Maxime S. The Institut Pasteur: 120 years of research in microbiology. Res Microbiol 2008; 159: 5–14. doi: 10.1016/j.resmic.2007.11.009

12. Institut Pasteur International Network. Institut Pasteur International Network /Missions. 2012. [cited 2013 14.12]; Available from: http://www.pasteur-international.org/ip/easysite/pasteur-international-en/institut-pasteur-international-network/missions.

13. Institut Pasteur International Network. Institut Pasteur International Network: report 2010. Paris: Institut Pasteur International Network; 2010. doi: 10.1007/springerreference_75854

14. Li LL, Ding G, Feng N, Wang MH, Ho YS. Global stem cell research trend: Bibliometric analysis as a tool for mapping of trends from 1991 to 2006. Scientometrics 2009; 80: 39–58.

15. Avital M, Collopy F. Assessing Research Performance: Implications for Selection and Motivation. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems 2001; 1: 1–14.

16. Butler L. Using a balanced approach to bibliometrics: quantitative performance measures in the Australian Research Quality Framework. Ethics Sci Environ Polit 2008; 8: 83–92. doi: 10.3354/esep00077

17. Geuna A, Martin BR. University research evaluation and funding: an international comparison. Minerva 2003; 41: 277–304. doi: 10.1023/b:mine.0000005155.70870.bd

18. Patel VM, Ashrafian H, Ahmed K, Arora S, Jiwan S, Nicholson JK, et al. How has healthcare research performance been assessed? A systematic review. J R Soc Med 2011; 104: 251–61. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110005

19. Aksnes DW. Citations and their use as indicators in science policy. Studies of validity and applicability issues with a particular focus on highly cited papers [Thesis]. Netherlands: University of Twente; 2005.

20. Leydesdorff L. ISI.exe [internet]. 2008. [cited 2012 Aug 25]. Available from: http://www.leydesdorff.net/software/isi/index.htm

21. Leydesdorff l, Persson O. Mapping the Geography of Science: Distribution Patterns and Networks of Relations among Cities and Institutes. JASIST 2010; 61: 1622–34. doi: 10.1002/asi.21347

22. Schneider A. About GPS Visualizer [internet]. 2012. [cited 2012 Aug 25]. Available from: http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/about.html

23. Batagelj V, Mrvar A. Pajek - Program for Large Network Analysis [internet]. 2013. [cited 2013 Mar 27]. Available from: http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php?id=pajek

24. Leydesdorff L, Wagner CS, Park HW, Adams J. International collaboration in science: The global map and the network. El profesional de la información 2013; 22: 87–95. doi: 10.3145/epi.2013.ene.12

25. Ortega JL, Aguillo IF. Mapping world-class universities on the web. Information Processing & Management 2009; 45: 272–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2008.10.001

26. Auguillo IF. Ranking web of universities methodology [internet]. 2012. [cited 2012 Aug 28]. Available from: http://www.webometrics.info/en/Methodology

27. National Science Fundation. Asia’s Rising Science and Technology Strength: Comparative Indicators for Asia, the European Union, and the United States [internet]. 2007. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf07319/

28. Tijssen RJW, Waltman L, Eck NJV. Research Collaboration and the Expanding Science Grid: Measuring globalization process worldwide [internet]. 2012. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4194

29. Hou H, Kretschmer H, Liu Z. The structure of scientific collaboration networks in Scientometrics. Scientometrics 2008; 75: 189–202. doi: 10.1080/09737766.2009.10700865

30. Iranian Ministry of Health. Ranking Iranina Medical universities according to research performance indicators [internet]. 2013. [cited 2013 Nov 17]. Available from: http://www.hbi.ir/NSite/FullStory/News/?Id=2184

31. Halevi G, Moed HF. Country Trends: Emerging scientific networks. Research Trends [serial on the internet]. 2011 Sep. Available from: http://www.researchtrends.com/issue24-september-2011/emerging-scientific-networks/

32. Abramo G, D’Angelo CA, Costa FD. Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation? Higher Education 2009; 57:155–71.

33. Harirchi G, Melin G, Etemad S. An exploratory study of the feature of Iranian co-authorships in biology, chemistry and physics. Scientometrics 2007; 72: 11–24.

34. Melin G. Pragmatism and self-organization: research collaboration on the individual level. Res Policy 2000; 29: 31–40.

35. Kim KW. Measuring international research collaboration of peripheral countries: Taking the context into consideration. Scientometrics 2006; 66: 231–40.

36. Persson O. Are highly cited papers more international? Scientometrics 2010; 83: 397–401.

37. Frenken K. The geography of collaborative knowledge production: Entropy techniques and results for the European Union [internet]. 2002. Available from: http://www-sre.wu-wien.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa02/cd-rom/papers/029.pdf

38. Mattsson P, Laget P, Vindefjard AN, Sundberg CJ. What do european research collaboration networks in life science look like? Res Eval 2010; 19: 373–84.

39. Onyancha OB, Maluleka JR. Knowledge production through Collaborative research in sub-saharan Africa: How much do countries contribute to each other’s knowledge output and citation impact? Scientometrics 2011; 87: 315–36.