Search

Previous bibliometric analyses of industrial symbiosis (IS) research have focused on a limited body of literature owing to the scope of keyword searches or limitations of library databases. This study seeks to apply bibliometrics to explore broader, epistemological questions, particularly about the structure and geospatial development of IS as a sub‐field of industrial ecology. We also evaluate the benefits of using Google Scholar, in addition to the conventional databases Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus, for better understanding academic domains. By using WoS and Scopus, 805 articles on IS that met our criteria were identified, published in 212 journals from 1995 through 2018. On average, the cumulative number of relevant articles grew at an exponential rate of 18% per year—more than double the estimated growth of global scientific output. We observed the largest increases in articles that: (1) model the material and energy flows in IS clusters; (2) propose strategies and ideas for implementing symbiosis; and (3) evaluate the performance of IS networks. By the end of 2018, 54 countries were featured in IS articles retrieved from WoS and Scopus, with China as the single most studied country. The analysis of Google Scholar suggested that it can capture more IS articles than the conventional databases owing to its unique characteristic of searching the entire text of documents rather than solely their metadata as with WoS and Scopus. Google Scholar revealed IS discourse from additional countries and disciplines previously omitted, enabling a more acute view of its patterns of diffusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As the volume of scientific publications increases, the rate of retraction of published papers is also likely to increase. In the present study, we report the characteristics of retracted papers from clinical neurosurgery and allied clinical and basic science specialties. Methods: Retracted papers were identified using two separate search strategies on PubMed. Attributes of the retracted papers were collected from PubMed and the Retraction Watch database. The reasons for retraction were analyzed. The factors that correlated with time to retraction were identified. Detailed citation analysis for the retracted papers was performed. The retraction rates for neurosurgery journals were computed. Results: A total of 191 retractions were identified; 55% pertained to clinical neurosurgery. The most common reasons for retraction were plagiarism, duplication, and compromised peer review. The countries associated with the highest number of retractions were China, USA, and Japan. The full text of the retraction notice was not available for 11% of the papers. A median of 50% of all citations received by the papers occurred after retraction. The factors that correlated with a longer time to retraction included basic science category, the number of collaborating departments, and the H-index of the journal. The overall rate of retractions in neurosurgery journals was 0.037%. Conclusions: The retraction notice needs to be freely available on all search engines. Plagiarism checks and reference checks prior to publication of papers (to ensure no retracted papers have been cited) must be mandatory. Mandatory data deposition would help overcome issues with data and results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]