Research Productivity of Life Sciences from 2014-2016: A Scientometric Study through Web of Science Database

A. Narendra; B. U. Kannappanavar

doi:10.51983/ajist-2019.9.2.262

Authors

A. Narendra Librarian, I.D.S.G. Government College, Chickmagalur, Karnataka, India
B. U. Kannappanavar Selection Grade Librarian, Sahyadri Arts College, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51983/ajist-2019.9.2.262

Keywords:

Scientometrics Analysis, Life Sciences, Subject Wise Distribution, Geographical Distribution, Web of Science, Research Trends

Abstract

This paper attempts to analyse quantitatively the growth and development of ‘Life Sciences’ research publication output as reflected in the Web of Science (WOS) database from 2014 to 2016. A total of 9941 papers published by the researchers in the Research areas Life Sciences. The Year wise analysis shows that Life Sciences reflected with 3313 papers per year. In the year 2016 topped with 3824 publications and the lowest were in the year 2014 with 2711 publications. The trend shows that Life Sciences Research productivity has gradually increased. Science Technology and other topics topped with 672 documents (6.72%) published, most of them are Journal article as document type with 7395 (74.39%) and the most preferred source is Co Charane Database of Systematic Reviews 215 (2.16%) to publish. The country-wise distribution shows that the USA ranked topped with 3151 (31.70%) publications. India published 242 (2.43%publications with 13th position). Among the authors, a total of 31 records published without the author name mentioned with Anonymous. Guruwwamy K S ranked first and published 25 articles, Davidson B R with 19 and Liu Y with 17. So many organizations/Institutions have published the articles in Life Sciences. Harvard University has published 131 (1.32%), followed by UCL 101 (1.02%), University Toronto 97 (0.98%) and so on.

References

Venkatesan, M. N., & Thanuskodi, S. (2014). A scientometric analysis of nuclear power generation research: a study. International Journal of Library and Information Studies, 4(3), 65-75.

Jeyshankar, R., Babu, B. R., & Rajendran, P. (2011). Research output of CSIR-central electrochemical research institute (CECRI): a study. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 58(4), 301-306.

Bharvi, D., Garg, K.C., & Bali, A. (2003). Scientometrics of the international journal Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 56(1), 81-93. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021950607895

Garg, K. (2002). Scientometrics of laser research in India and China. Scientometrics, 55(1), 71-85. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016050920365

Hood, W., & Wilson, C. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291-314. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017919924342

Moin, M., Mahmoudi, M., & Rezaei, N. (2005). Scientific output of Iran at the threshold of the 21st century. Scientometrics, 62(2), 239-248. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0017

Rajgoli, I. U., & Laxminarsaiah, A. (2015). Authorship pattern and collaborative research in the field of spacecraft technology. The Electronic Library, 33(4), 625-642. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2013-0210

Karpagam, R. (2014). Global research output of nano-biotechnology research: a scientometrics study. Current Science, 106(11), 1490-1499.