Search

This article examines research performance of management academics in the Group of Eight (Go8) Australian universities using SCOPUS publication data. Normative research profiles for journal publications, book publications, citations, and h -index are provided for each academic level. The number of journal publications are reported for seven different journal ranking lists. The average Go8 management scholar increases the number of total journal publications per year by 56% over their entire publishing career, but does not increase the number of top international journal publications per year. Importantly, the top quartile of Go8 management scholars – who account for 70% of top journal publications and 79% of journal citations – already achieve world class productivity in the top international journals. We hope Go8 Deans and Heads of School use the research performance benchmarks to inform faculty recruitment, tenure and promotion decisions. JEL Classification: I23, M1, M19 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores strategies for generating and evaluating novel research ideas. Researchers can identify promising ideas by systematically exposing themselves to new, practitioner‐relevant information and by contrasting emerging facts with existing theories. Additionally, by identifying the necessary conditions that are required for an idea to become a viable research project, researchers can quickly discard low‐prospect ideas, freeing up mental space and time to evaluate new research opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The aim of this study was to describe the research productivity among RANZCR Radiation Oncology (RO) trainees. Methods: Publicly available data on RO fellows, who were awarded the RANZCR fellowship between July 2014 and June 2023, was extracted from the RANZCR Annual Reports. Fellows who had qualified overseas and did not undertake full RANZCR training were excluded. A PubMed search was performed for publications by each fellow in the 5 years prior, and 6 months, after the estimated completion of training. Research productivity was defined as the number of first‐author and any‐author publications per trainee. Results: In total, 168 eligible RO fellows were included in this study. 104 (62%) and 118 (70%) fellows had first‐author and any‐author publications during training, respectively. A total of 203 first‐author and 308 unique any‐author publications were identified, with mean first‐author and any‐author publications per trainee of 1.21 (SD = 2.37) and 2.02 (SD = 3.71), respectively. Trainee research was most commonly published in JMIRO (34% of first‐author and 27% of any‐author publications). There were significant differences in the number of first‐author publications by gender (P = 0.04) and training jurisdictions (P = 0.03). There were also differences in the number of any‐author publications by gender (P = 0.002) and training jurisdictions (P = 0.03). There was a significant increase in any‐author publications over the 9‐year study period (P = 0.005). Conclusion: This is the first study evaluating research productivity among RO fellows during training. We identified disparities in research productivity by gender and training jurisdictions. This offers opportunities to tailor efforts to better support a vibrant and productive research culture across the RO training program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses event history analysis to show what promotes tenure in German economics, utilizing a unique and virtually complete national dataset that includes 70,657 publications from 3955 economists, of which 1196 received tenure between 1984 and 2021. While existing theories emphasize that gender discrimination, parenthood, human capital, academic prestige, and social capital explain who is tenured, no study has thus far evaluated these factors concurrently across an entire national population of economists. Our findings reveal that fewer women receive tenure than would be expected based on their representation in the candidate pool. However, gender, parenthood, and non-reviewed publications do not significantly influence tenure attainment after controlling for covariates. Instead, mobility, accessing advanced career stages, and peer-reviewed journal articles are most strongly related to receiving tenure. Independently of productivity, academic prestige, such as receiving grants and awards, also impacts tenure prospects significantly, as does social capital, measured through research mobility, interim professorships and co-authorships. Being affiliated with prestigious universities shows minimal effects on receiving tenure, however. These findings imply that mobility, moving up career stages and being productive by publishing peer-reviewed journal articles are the strongest determinants of becoming a tenured economics professor in Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aims to provide a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of rubric research. The bibliometric method was employed to evaluate research output in the field. The study evaluated 13,651 Scopus publications from 1850 to 2023using Vosviewer, Biblishiny, and MS-Excel using bibliometric software. Notable findings include an 80% increase in scientific contributions over the previous two decades, with 2023 having the highest publication count at 1172. The study analyzes years, top-cited papers, sources, prolific authors, and leading organizations and countries in rubrics research. Clusters of co-occurring author keywords suggest common topics, including Education and learning methods (Cluster # 1), Professional development and skills (Cluster # 2), Learning and education research (Cluster # 3), Assessment and evaluation in nursing education (Cluster # 4), Assessment and accreditation in education (Cluster # 5), Assessment and scoring in writing education (Cluster # 6), and Pedagogy and innovation in education (Cluster # 7).This bibliometric study provides valuable insights for educators and researchers, guiding future research and enhancing global understanding of rubrics in educational contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This investigation explores gender differences in faculty research productivity in Chinese research-oriented universities. Based on human capital theory and a work-family conflict research framework, this investigation identifies potential variables that influence faculty research productivity. These variables include academic experience, family responsibility, and work-family conflict. Drawing on a representative sample of faculty at the early academic career stage (N = 1013) from China's research universities, this investigation finds a significant gender gap in faculty research productivity. Male faculty have significantly higher research productivity than female faculty. Compared to family-related variables, academic experience-related variables such as research time investment, hosting of national-level research projects, and research collaboration within and outside of a university can positively predict research productivity. Work-family conflict negatively influences faculty research productivity and plays a mediating role in the effects of academic experience variables on research productivity. The findings of this investigation advocate for gender equality policies in Chinese research universities in aid of female faculty. This investigation offers recommendations from the perspective of both female faculty and academic institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper investigates the impact of Ecuador's Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior (LOES), enacted in 2010, which mandated comprehensive reforms in higher education. Objective: The objective of this study is to determine whether the implementation of the LOES has led to a significant increase in academic publications in Ecuador, thereby contributing to sustainable educational practices and aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this context, sustainability refers to the ongoing capacity of higher education institutions to generate research that contributes to the long-term development of knowledge, aligns with global sustainability goals, and ensures educational practices that are responsive to societal needs. Methods: Using a synthetic control method, this study evaluates the impact of the LOES on the number of academic publications recorded in Scopus. A synthetic control consisting of data from countries with similar educational and economic profiles serves as a counterfactual to Ecuador's situation. Results: Before the LOES, the average annual number of publications was stable at 253.4 per year. Post-2010, this number surged, reaching an average of 3645.84 publications per year, representing a 358.41% increase. By 2023, the actual number of publications in Ecuador rose to approximately 6584, significantly surpassing the synthetic control estimate of 1431 publications. Conclusions: The findings confirm that the LOES has been effective in increasing research output and advancing educational sustainability in Ecuador. This analysis not only contributes to the literature on the impact of educational policies but also demonstrates the utility of synthetic control methods in assessing policy effectiveness, underscoring the potential of targeted interventions to promote academic excellence and sustainability in education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Childhood cancer rates in Africa are lower than in high-income countries but increasing, making pediatric cancers a significant public health concern. The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the publication of pediatric cancer research in Africa, including publication types and citation trends over time. Methods: The Science Citation Index Expanded database within the Web of Science Core Collection was searched for articles published from 1991 to 2022 in the topic domain, using title, abstract, author keywords, and KeyWords Plus. Indicators used to assess publications performance of the countries included: total number of publications, single-country publications, collaborative publications with African countries, collaborative publications with non-African countries, first-author publications, corresponding-author publications, and single-author publications. Results: A total of 4461 relevant documents were retrieved, with 2770 original research articles. Annual number of articles rose from 13 articles in 1991 to 287 in 2022. Most articles were produced by Egypt (28 %) in North Africa, followed by South Africa (20 %) in sub-Saharan Africa. Collaboration between African countries remains low; however, international collaborations have enhanced the average number of citations per article. Most of the first authors (65 %) and corresponding authors (67 %) of these international collaborative articles were affiliated with non-African institutions. Conclusions: The number of publications sharply increased over the study period and diversely represents African countries. Collaborations with international partners increased citations; however, few of these publications had African first authors. Conversely, inter-institutional partnerships between African countries were relatively low, highlighting the need for better collaboration within Africa.

Affirmative action (AA) has long been viewed negatively in contemporary society. The political philosophies of AA are still widely misunderstood and fiercely debated around the world today. The argument against AA is that faculty hired through AA are less efficient than those hired through open/general category. This research attempts to empirically assess if professors from the Other Backward Class (OBC), Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) categories in India's three Central Universities are equally productive and effective as their General category counterparts. The effectiveness of the four teaching categories (General/OBC/SC/ST) was evaluated using the CCR model of Data Envelopment Analysis, while the productivity of teachers was estimated using bibliometric analysis. The data analysis demonstrates that AA positively impacts the research productivity of marginalized groups, except ST, which has very low representation in Pure and Applied Sciences, with OBC and SC performing on par with their General counterpart when placed in higher productivity subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Incorporating scientific research into undergraduate medical education is necessary for the quality of future health care. However, providing rigorous research training to a large number of medical students at one institution remains one of the major challenges. The authors studied the impact of a curriculum-based Research Training Program (RTP) for all undergraduate students at Zhejiang University School of Medicine (ZUSM) on research productivity and future research interests. Methods Medical students (n = 2,213) from ZUSM who completed the course of RTP between 2013 and 2020 were studied. The authors measured the academic performance, research publications, and research projects of students across years, and evaluated potential factors that contribute to student research productivity and increased interest in future research. Results Across the years, there was an increase in the number of student publications, a greater proportion of students with publications, and a greater proportion of projects involving three or more students (P

Abstract Background Medical research productivity is globally increasing, with a lagging progress in third-world countries due to significant challenges, including inadequate training and brain drain. Syria had been showing a slow upward trend until the war broke out and severely hindered academic growth and productivity. A deeper understanding of the factors influencing research productivity in this context are fundamental to guide educational policies and resource allocation. Previous cross-sectional studies that evaluated the perspectives of Syrian academics on the issue were limited by the small sample size of published healthcare workers, making it difficult to identify the factors that enabled them to pursue research. Methods To address this challenge, we employed a case-control design. We isolated published early-career Syrian healthcare workers and compared their characteristics and perceptions to unpublished matched controls. Authors in the fields of medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy affiliated with any Syrian University were identified through an extensive search of PubMed and Google Scholar.These authors were invited to complete a questionnaire that covered participants’ research contributions, alongside their self-assessed knowledge, attitudes, and barriers towards research. The questionnaire was publicly published to recruit an equal sample of matching controls, with half consisting of unpublished researchers and the other half of participants without prior research contributions. Results Six-hundred-sixteen participants were recruited. Their knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers explained 46% and 34% of the variability in research involvement and publication, respectively (P

PurposeMethodsResultsConclusionThe objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between research activity and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding status of the United States (US) academic ophthalmologists.A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of bibliometric data was conducted. The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports (rePORTER) website was utilized to identify ophthalmology departments in the US that received NIH funding. Affiliated faculty from these institutions were then identified using NIH rePORTER and institutional websites. H-index was calculated using the Scopus database, and the NIH iCite tool was used to determine the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR). The h-index and w-RCR quantified research productivity, while m-RCR measured research impact.Data on 2688 faculty members from 66 departments we re identified, of which 21% were NIH-funded. Faculty members who received NIH-funding had significantly greater research productivity and impact as measured by h-index (32.5 vs 16.6; p < .001), m-RCR (2.2 vs 1.6; p < .001), and w-RCR (147.2 vs 70.1; p < .001) than their non-funded peers. When stratified by academic rank, NIH-funded faculty still had significantly higher h-index (16.1 vs 7.9; p < .001), m-RCR (2.2 vs 1.4; p < .001), and w-RCR (63.2 vs 61.8; p < .001) than non-funded peers. A similar trend was observed among non-tenured faculty members.NIH funding is associated with higher research productivity and impact among US academic ophthalmologists as measured by h-index and RCR, which suggests that NIH funding may be a critical factor in enhancing scholarly contributions of ophthalmologists.  These findings underscore the importance of continued investment in NIH funding to foster high-impact research within the field of ophthalmology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Featured Application: This analysis can guide national science policy for enhancing research in blockchain, privacy, and cybersecurity. Policymakers can use the findings to allocate resources effectively. For blockchain and cybersecurity research, countries might focus on economic development and research funding. To boost privacy research, nations could strengthen democratic institutions alongside economic factors. International organizations could use this analysis to identify high-potential countries for targeted support. This study examines the factors influencing scientific productivity in blockchain, privacy, and cybersecurity research across countries. While previous research has explored the determinants of general scientific output, less is known about the patterns of influence in these technological fields, which have been dominantly studied with a bibliometric focus. Using regression models, we analyze the impact of economic, political, educational, and social factors on the publication rates in these domains. Data from international databases on country-level indicators and scientific publications form the basis of our analysis. The results show that Gross National Income per capita is the strongest predictor of research output across all the fields studied. Research spending as a percentage of GDP also demonstrates a consistent positive relationship with publication rates. However, the impact of the factors varies across fields. This research provides insights for policymakers and institutions aiming to enhance research capabilities in these critical areas of technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Incorporating scientific research into undergraduate medical education is necessary for the quality of future health care. However, providing rigorous research training to a large number of medical students at one institution remains one of the major challenges. The authors studied the impact of a curriculum-based Research Training Program (RTP) for all undergraduate students at Zhejiang University School of Medicine (ZUSM) on research productivity and future research interests. Methods: Medical students (n = 2,213) from ZUSM who completed the course of RTP between 2013 and 2020 were studied. The authors measured the academic performance, research publications, and research projects of students across years, and evaluated potential factors that contribute to student research productivity and increased interest in future research. Results: Across the years, there was an increase in the number of student publications, a greater proportion of students with publications, and a greater proportion of projects involving three or more students (P <.01 for all). The academic performance of the course was associated with increased publications (P =.014), whereas overall satisfaction of the course (OR 2.07, 95% CI [1.39, 3.10], P <.001), Skill Composite Score (SCS) (OR 1.70, 95% CI [1.16, 2.50], P =.007), and male gender (OR 1.50, 95% CI [1.06, 2.12], P =.022) were associated with increased future research interests. Conclusions: The findings suggest that the curriculum-based RTP improved students' research productivity, and that overall program satisfaction and self-assessed performance were associated with increased students' intent to participate in future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index (h‐index) and the more recently developed relative citation ratio (RCR), are utilized to evaluate research productivity. Our study evaluates demographics, research productivity, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in academic otology. Methods: Academic otologists were identified, and their demographics were collected using institutional faculty profiles (N = 265). Funding data were obtained using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports Database. The h‐index was calculated using Scopus and mean (m‐RCR) and weighted RCR (w‐RCR) were calculated using the NIH iCite tool. Results: H‐index (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10–1.27, p < 0.001), but not m‐RCR (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97–2.31, p = 0.069) or w‐RCR (aOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99–1.00, p = 0.231), was associated with receiving NIH funding. Men had greater h‐index (16 vs. 9, p < 0.001) and w‐RCR (51.8 vs. 23.0, p < 0.001), but not m‐RCR (1.3 vs. 1.3, p = 0.269) than women. Higher academic rank was associated with greater h‐index and w‐RCR (p < 0.001). Among assistant professors, men had greater h‐index than women (9.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.025). At career duration 11–20 years, men had greater h‐index (14.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.009) and w‐RCR (52.7 vs. 25.8, p = 0.022) than women. Conclusion: The h‐index has a strong relationship with NIH funding in academic otology. Similar h‐index, m‐RCR, and w‐RCR between men and women across most academic ranks and career durations suggests production of similarly impactful research. The m‐RCR may correct some deficiencies of time‐dependent bibliometrics and its consideration in academic promotion and research funding allocation may promote representation of women in otology. Level of Evidence: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:3786–3794, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Methods Results Conclusion Rewards can both validate and promote the stature of a researcher in their field. Research has been mixed on the role of gender as a predictor of receiving scholarly awards, but much of it lacks control for research excellence, and awards in interdisciplinary associations have been neglected. This study fills these gaps for suicidology.Bibliometric data from the Web of Science was utilized for this study. To control for research excellence the analysis is restricted to the 116 most highly prolific researchers, each with 70 or more works published on suicide, from the Web of Science. The research awards in suicidology, given by three different interdisciplinary associations, include the Louis I. Dublin Award, the Morselli Medal, and the Stengel Research Award. The link between gender and receipt of a major award is adjusted for possible mediators including long‐term research productivity (h‐index), years of experience, and organizational prestige.While the percentage of women winning awards is less than that of men, we find that there is no significant difference between the genders. The quality of research and years of experience predict the receipt of each award.Based on a bibliometric analysis, women are not at a disadvantage in receiving research awards in suicidology. These results are consistent with recent research on gender and awards in economics, mathematics, and psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractThis study evaluates psychiatry and mental health publications in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region, specifically focusing on the Philippines from 1996 to 2023. Academic publication varies among ASEAN states, with Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand leading. Despite the 2018 Mental Health Act, the Philippines did not significantly increase research output. However, the COVID-19 pandemic spurred mental health research in the Philippines. This highlights the need for further research on barriers and research quality. Policymakers should consider these findings for regional mental health research strategies. The study also shows the research community’s adaptability during crises, which can inform future responses to public health challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medical research productivity is globally increasing, with a lagging progress in third-world countries due to significant challenges, including inadequate training and brain drain. Syria had been showing a slow upward trend until the war broke out and severely hindered academic growth and productivity. A deeper understanding of the factors influencing research productivity in this context are fundamental to guide educational policies and resource allocation. Previous cross-sectional studies that evaluated the perspectives of Syrian academics on the issue were limited by the small sample size of published healthcare workers, making it difficult to identify the factors that enabled them to pursue research. Methods: To address this challenge, we employed a case-control design. We isolated published early-career Syrian healthcare workers and compared their characteristics and perceptions to unpublished matched controls. Authors in the fields of medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy affiliated with any Syrian University were identified through an extensive search of PubMed and Google Scholar.These authors were invited to complete a questionnaire that covered participants' research contributions, alongside their self-assessed knowledge, attitudes, and barriers towards research. The questionnaire was publicly published to recruit an equal sample of matching controls, with half consisting of unpublished researchers and the other half of participants without prior research contributions. Results: Six-hundred-sixteen participants were recruited. Their knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers explained 46% and 34% of the variability in research involvement and publication, respectively (P < 0.001). Getting involved in and publishing research studies associated with higher research-related knowledge and attitudes (P < 0.001). Respondents' assessment of research-related barriers and their academic scores did not differ between cases and controls. Superior research-related knowledge and attitudes were associated with male gender, higher English competency, and better internet connectivity. Meanwhile, extracurricular training and mentors' support were associated with more positive research-related attitudes and less perceived barriers. Conclusions: Research productivity of medical professionals in Syria exhibits a positive correlation with their knowledge and favorable attitudes towards medical research. Noteworthy, the demographic variations are linked to disparities in research-related knowledge and motivation. In conclusion, these results suggest a potential avenue for enhancement through concentrated efforts on improving extracurricular training interventions and mentors' support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research analysed the research outcome of Bharathidasan University in terms of publication output as classified in the new subject classification of Web of Science Database as Macro, Meso, Micro topics. The analysis could reveal that Bharathidasan University has contributed into all the 10 Macro 326 Meso, 2500 Micro as classified by the source database. While the researcher taken into consideration of the top 20 areas of research where Bharathidasan University faculty and researchers pursued and published. In addition, frequency and percentage analysis, the analytical tools, VOSviewer, Histcite, Excel have been used. The research trends in terms of quantum of publications, the Journal source and funding agencies have been correlated at national level, while it varies significantly at Global Level. The global output of the identified 20 highly concentrated research areas of Bharathidasan University, India has had a dominant position as it holds 6th position in two of the subject categories. All the top 5 major contributing subject areas were India is in fourth place among the Asian nations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the study was to investigate the research and publication output of librarians from the College Libraries Information Network (COLINET) in Jamaica over a 20-year span (2001–2021). The study examined the challenges librarians face; the support mechanisms and strategies in place for research and publishing productivity, and COLINET librarians’ perceptions of their roles in fostering a research culture. The study utilised a mixed-methods survey approach. An online survey was designed using Google Forms and distributed to COLINET librarians via the COLINET Google group and individual emails. Extensive literature search strategies across local and international databases were employed to ascertain the research and publication output by librarians in COLINET over a 20-year span from 2001–2021. With a response rate of 50%, the results indicated the research and publication output of COLINET librarians and the perceptions of COLINET librarians’ roles in fostering research and publishing culture. The conclusions showed that COLINET members need to adapt and foster a culture of research and publishing among its librarians. The recommended strategies to encourage research and publishing are also high-lighted. This study will assist COLINET librarians in Jamaica in cultivating and advancing a culture of excellence in research and publishing. Additionally, it will add to the empirical literature on Caribbean librarians’ culture of research and publishing productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper deals with the publication pattern of faculty members of Rajarambapu Institute of Technology (RIT), Islampur, (Maharashtra), India based on the research output as reflected in the Scopus database during the period from 2010 to 2020. The study examined research performance based on their publication output, using different bibliometric indicators, such as the growth of publications, authorship pattern, collaborative index, highly productive author and journal, citation pattern etc. Bibliometric techniques were applied to a total number of 402 publications for eleven years. The extracted bibliographical and citation data was analysed and evaluated using MS Excel and Bibexcel applications and the visualisation was done using VOSviewer software. Major findings of the study revealed that the number of research publications and citations at the RIT has increased over the last eleven years. Most 246 (61.19%) of the publications were published in the form of conference papers, Dr. Thorat A.R. is the most productive author having 24 publications, and 'The Journal of Engineering Education Transformations' is a prominent journal for research publication at the RIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we analyze the evolution of Latin American (LATAM) Business Economics (BE) publications in international journals from 2005 to 2019. Using publications in Web of Science Core Collection (WoS), we analyze which characteristics of collaboration result in higher impact, i.e., total number of citations, and journals' WoS impact factor. Our findings show that the number of publications in journals indexed in the WoS by researchers in LATAM have been rising in terms of the number of publications and impact measured by citations. Moreover, researchers in the region are publishing in journals with higher impact factor. The analysis shows that the main drivers of impact are multilateral and bilateral collaboration, number of countries, number of authors, and the number of categories of knowledge. Specifically, multilateral collaboration is a key factor of influential papers. Other aspects that increase the impact of publications are publishing in English and collaborating with authors from the United States. Our results also suggest a slight decrease in the impact as the number of coauthors increase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the impact of pre‐fellowship publications on future research productivity and career placement among head and neck (H&N) surgery fellowship graduates. Methods: H&N surgery fellowship graduates between 2014 and 2022 were identified from publicly available data. Timing of fellowship graduation, number of publications during each stage of education and training, and number of first authorship publications were analyzed for association with scholarly productivity and academic career placement. Results: In our analysis of 409 H&N fellowship graduates, there was a strong positive correlation between the year of fellowship graduation and the average number of publications in residency (R2 = 0.82) and fellowship (R2 = 0.79). Graduates producing more than the average of 2.37 publications prior to residency had a significantly higher average number of publications during residency and fellowship compared to those who published below average (p < 0.001). A higher number of publications prior to and during residency were both independently associated with a higher likelihood of academic career placement (p = 0.015 and p = 0.002, respectively). More first‐author publications prior to residency were associated with a higher number of publications during residency and fellowship (p = 0.015). In sub‐analyses, gender did not impact the average number of publications during residency and fellowship. Similarly, the COVID‐19 pandemic did not significantly impact the average number of publications during the fellowship when comparing the classes of 2020–2022 to 2017–2019. Conclusion: Research productivity among H&N fellowship graduates has increased in recent years. Research productivity in medical school and residency is associated with scholarly output in later stages of training and academic career placement. Level of Evidence: NA Laryngoscope, 134:3165–3169, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the latest decade of Australian sociology PhD completions for differences in the number and quality of research outputs students published during doctoral enrolment. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between Go8 PhD students and their non-Go8 PhD counterparts in terms of either the quantity of research publications achieved, or the quality of these publications as measured by high-impact journals. There was also insufficient evidence statistically to conclude that Go8 men and Go8 women differed from one another, or that non-Go8 men and non-Go8 women differed from one another in overall quantity of outputs and publishing in high-impact journals. However, publishing success of men and women, when combined, regardless of whether they were at elite Go8 or non-Go8 institutions, showed gender had a marginally significant effect on publication productivity, men outperforming women, in both publication counts and in publishing in high-impact journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significant advancements in public health come from scientific discoveries, but more are needed to meet the ever‐growing societal needs. Examining the best practices of outstanding scientists may help develop future researchers and lead to more discoveries. This study compared the comprehensive work of 49 Nobel laureates in Physiology or Medicine from 2000 to 2019 to a matched control of National Institutes of Health (NIH)‐funded biomedical investigators. Our unique data set, comprising 11,737 publications, 571 US patents, and 1693 NIH research awards produced by pre‐Nobel laureates, was compared to a similar data set of control researchers. Compared to control researchers, pre‐Nobel laureates produce significantly more publications annually (median = 5.66; interquartile range [IQR] = 5.16); significantly fewer coauthors per publication (median = 3.32; IQR = 1.95); consistently higher Journal Impact Factor publications (median = 12.04; IQR = 6.83); and substantially more patents per researcher (median = 5; IQR = 14). Such differences arose from nearly identical cumulative NIH award budgets of pre‐Nobel laureates (median $25.3 M) and control researchers. Nobel laureates are neither hyper‐prolific (>72 papers per year) nor hyper‐funded (>$100 M cumulative). An academic age–specific trajectory graph allows aspiring researchers to compare their productivity and collaboration patterns to those of pre‐Nobel laureates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study examined the influence of the use of openaccess resources on the research productivity of librarians in state university libraries in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. It adopted a descriptive survey research design. The study population consisted of twenty-four (24) librarians in two state university libraries in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. The study sample comprised twenty-one (21) librarians, which was drawn using the total enumeration sampling technique. An online questionnaire was employed for data collection. The instrument was validated by senior lecturers in Library and Information Science and Measurement/Evaluation at Niger Delta University, Bayelsa State, Nigeria. A reliability test was not conducted on the instrument based on the knowledge that a valid test tends to be reliable. Mean, standard deviation, straightforward percentages, and linear regression were used for data analysis. The data analysis showed that librarians in state university libraries in Bayelsa State, Nigeria, used open-access resources to a great extent; the level of their research productivity was shallow; their use of the resources had a positive but insignificant influence on their research productivity. The research suggested that librarians should explore more outlets that grant them access to more open-access resources and undergo digital literacy skills training to sharpen their digital literacy and enable them to take full advantage of the resources for their research activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We document trends and patterns in the key attributes of the 24 top journals during 2001–2021 using data from the Web of Science. These trends include growth by disciplines and journals represented among selected journals in terms of growth in publications, relative publication share of disciplines, number of unique authors, attributes of prolific authors, and the extent of interdisciplinary contributions. We compare and contrast our findings with prior studies and offer a few conjectures on similarities and differences in the findings. We hope that our descriptive findings will spur further research on the production function of science and help identify the determinants of research productivity in top journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: Existing literature overlooks the role of gender and race on research productivity, particularly in the context of primary care research. This study examines how gender and race influence the research productivity of primary care researchers in Canada, addressing a gap in existing literature. Methods: Qualitative, descriptive methods were used, involving 60-min interviews with 23 Canadian primary care researchers. 13 participants were female (57%) and 10 participants (43%) were male. Fourteen participants were White (non-racialized; 61%), 8 were racialized (35%) and 1 did not comment on race (4%). Reflexive thematic analysis captured participant perceptions of factors influencing research productivity, including individual, professional, institutional, and systemic aspects. Findings: Systemic bias and institutional culture, including racism, sexism, and unconscious biases against racialized women, emerge as key barriers to research productivity. The parenting life stage further compounds these biases. Barriers include lack of representation in faculty roles, toxic work environments, research productivity metrics, and exclusion by colleagues. Participants indicated that institutional reforms and systemic interventions are needed to foster a diverse, equitable, and inclusive environment. Strategies include recruiting equity-focused leaders, increasing representation of racialized female faculty, diversity training, mentorship programs, providing meaningful support, flexible work arrangements, and protected research time. Sponsors can offer more targeted grants for female and racialized researchers. Adjusting metrics for gender, race, parenthood, and collaborative metrics is proposed to enhance diversity and inclusion among researchers. Interpretation: This study underscores the importance of addressing systemic bias at institutional and systemic levels to create a fair and supportive environment for primary care researchers. A multitude of strategies are needed including increasing representation of racialized female faculty, creating supportive and psychologically safe work environments, and public reporting of data on faculty composition for accreditation and funding decisions. Together, these strategies can alleviate the triple whammy and free these researchers from the Sisyphus Punishment – the absurdity of being asked to climb a hill while pushing a boulder with no hope of reaching the top. Funding: College of Family Physicians of Canada.

The World Class University trend in higher education has an impact on the need for planning in the research aspect because the quantity and quality of research are very influential in global university rankings. This research explores planning strategies as well as challenges and obstacles in efforts to increase the research productivity of lecturers in the Building Engineering Education Study Program, Universitas Negeri Jakarta based on the perspective of the study program coordinator. This research uses a qualitative descriptive approach using data collection techniques in the form of documentation complete with interviews with the study program coordinator. The research productivity increases in some years, such 2021 and 2023, but there are inconsistent research trends from 2017 to 2024. Some of the plans carried out by the study program to increase lecturer research productivity include the 1 lecturer 1 publication per year program, expanding cooperation and collaboration with national and international universities in research and scientific publications, holding international scientific article publication workshops, initiating collaboration with industry in the field of research and forming a research team of lecturers. The obstacles and challenges faced by the study program include lecturer workload, resources, funding, and research administration burden

This study examined the effect of transactional leadership behaviors on research productivity in public universities, with organizational learning capability serving as a mediating factor. A quantitative research approach focusing on correlational design was utilized. Data were collected through a survey questionnaire administered to 519 respondents. Both measurement and structural model analyses were conducted, with deans, colleges, and individual academics serving as units of analysis. The findings revealed that deans’ contingent reward leadership behaviors significantly and positively influenced the research productivity of academics and colleges, even when controlling for workplace learning capability. Furthermore, the study demonstrated that deans’ contingent rewards and active-by-exception behaviors significantly and positively impacted workplace learning capability, accounting for 44.5% of the variance, with moderate and small effect sizes, respectively. Additionally, organizational learning capability exhibited a significant positive effect, explaining 54% of the variance in research productivity and demonstrating a moderate effect size, which indicates an unexplained variance of 46%. Bootstrapping tests confirmed that workplace learning capability partially and fully mediates the relationship between deans’ transactional leadership behaviors and research productivity. Consequently, it is imperative for college deans to enhance their contingent reward leadership behaviors and foster workplace learning capabilities to maximize their impact on research productivity.

The study aimed to assess the research productivity of the faculty members in five private colleges in the province of Albay. This study used a multi-method approach in determining the research productivity, factors affecting the research productivity of respondents, and significant agreement on the factors affecting the research productivity of respondents among the private colleges in the province of Albay. A survey questionnaire, document analysis, statistical analysis, and literature review were incorporated. The study found varying levels of research productivity across the institutions. Researchership, institutional support, motivation, leadership practices, and research orientation all notably impact research productivity. The top areas influencing research productivity are time management, research-related development opportunities, and alignment of research agenda with institutional strengths. There is a statistically significant agreement on the factors affecting the research productivity of the respondents. Specific areas for interventions could aim to strengthen leadership practices that provide professional development opportunities, effective time management, research funding, faculty research writing aptitude, and a clear research agenda. A Research Development Program was designed based on the findings of the study. The components of this program are mentorship pairs and collaboration, internal research funding, seminar series, research facilities and resources, and research excellence recognition.

Abstract Background Research evidence to inform primary care policy and practice is essential for building high-performing primary care systems. Nevertheless, research output relating to primary care remains low worldwide. This study describes the factors associated with the research productivity of primary care researchers. Methods A qualitative, descriptive key informant study approach was used to conduct semi-structured interviews with twenty-three primary care researchers across Canada. Qualitative data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results Twenty-three primary care researchers participated in the study. An interplay of personal (psychological characteristics, gender, race, parenthood, education, spousal occupation, and support), professional (mentorship before appointment, national collaborations, type of research, career length), institutional (leadership, culture, resources, protected time, mentorship, type), and system (funding, systematic bias, environment, international collaborations, research data infrastructure) factors were perceived to be associated with research productivity. Research institutes and mentors facilitated collaborations, and mentors and type of research enabled funding success. Jurisdictions with fewer primary care researchers had more national collaborations but fewer funding opportunities. The combination of institutional, professional, and system factors were barriers to the research productivity of female and/or racialized researchers. Conclusions This study illuminates the intersecting and multifaceted influences on the research productivity of primary care researchers. By exploring individual, professional, institutional, and systemic factors, we underscore the pivotal role of diverse elements in shaping RP. Understanding these intricate influencers is imperative for tailored, evidence-based interventions and policies at the level of academic institutions and funding agencies to optimize resources, promote fair evaluation metrics, and cultivate inclusive environments conducive to diverse research pursuits within the PC discipline in Canada.

Background: Research experience is mandatory for all Orthopaedic Surgery residency programs. Although the allocation of required protected time and resources varies from program to program, the underlying importance of research remains consistent with mutual benefit to both residents and the program and faculty. Authorship and publications have become the standard metric used to evaluate academic success. This study aimed to determine if there is a correlation between the research productivity of Orthopaedic Surgery trainees and their subsequent research productivity as attending Orthopaedic Surgeons. Methods: Using the University of Mississippi Orthopaedic Residency Program Research Productivity Rank List, 30 different Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs were analyzed for the names of every graduating surgeon in their 2013 class. PubMed Central was used to screen all 156 physicians and collect all publications produced by them between 2008 and August 2022. Results were separated into two categories: Publications during training and Publications post-training. Results: As defined above, 156 Surgeons were analyzed for publications during training and post-training. The mean number of publications was 7.02 ± 17.819 post-training vs. 2.47 ± 4.313 during training, P

The study examined faculty’s research productivity, their perceptions of influence of factors and policy directives on their research productivity. It also examined the correlation between faculty’s gender, level of education, years of teaching experience and their research productivity. A questionnaire was used to collect data from 162 faculty members at four public higher education institutions (HEIs). Descriptive and multiple regression analysis were used to analyze the data. The results showed that faculty’s research productivity was significantly low. For instance, 76% of the participants reported publishing 468 articles in national journals while 71% of them reported publishing 253 works in international journals since they started working as faculty. Around 82% of the participants did not publish any articles in international journals indexed in Web of Science, Scopus, or PubMed. Furthermore, 54% of the participants did not publish any articles in international journals over the one-year period (2022). The participants believed that various factors influenced their publications in international journals including lack of access to funding, journal articles and data analysis tools. Furthermore, Faculty perceived policy mandates to have varying degrees of influence on their decisions to publish their works on different venues including international and high-impact journals. The study revealed a significant correlation between participants’ characteristics, particularly their years of teaching experience and their research productivity, which highlights the significance of tailoring policies and interventions to diverse needs of various faculty groups to enhance their research productivity.

AbstractHigher education institutions dominate research productivity in many parts of the world. Nonetheless, many academics in developing countries—including Tanzania—perform poorly in research. This study aims to qualitatively explore the barriers to research productivity in Tanzanian public higher education institutions. Using semi-structured interviews with thirty university leaders, regulatory agency officials, and academics from Tanzania’s four largest public institutions and reviewing official documents on higher education, the study found that institutional and individual factors hinder academic research productivity. Institutional barriers include inadequate research funding, heavy workloads, weak collaboration, fragmented research policies, a lack of researchers with impeccable credentials, weak databases, weak mentorship, and informal rewards and incentives. Individual barriers included limited research expertise and interest. Overcoming these challenges requires strategic inter- and intra-institutional collaboration. It also requires capacity-building, instituted mentorship for young researchers, redesigned incentive and rewards programs, improved funding, policy harmonization, and strengthened institutional and national research repositories.

This study aims to characterize the strategies researchers used to cope with Covid-19 impact and to explore the relationship between those strategies, researchers' characteristics and the pandemic impact in their lives. 721 researchers, proportionally distributed among three Spanish regions, answered an online survey on the pandemic impact on their activity. Scales referred to social support, productivity, research tasks, working conditions, and work and personal life balance. An open-ended section was included to collect the strategies they used to cope with the pandemic consequences. 1528 strategies were content analysed and categorised based on their purposes and related to the rest of the impact variables. Results show the predominance of some strategies for the whole sample both at the work level, such as organizing work duties and plans, and at the personal level, such as maintaining life-work balance and improving personal well-being. Results stress to what extent a strategic approach contributed to minimize contextual issues or constraints even in an extreme situation as the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown. A non-strategic approach, consisting of just reacting emotionally or dropping research, was the less effective way to maintain interest in research, sustained work and productivity and to warrant work-life balance. Developing a strategic approach was easier for those without caring responsibilities and for men. Women in our study, especially with caring responsibilities, had reduced opportunities to continue with their careers during the pandemic. No evidence of institutional strategies supporting researchers to cope with the situation was found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing internationalization of Higher Education Institutions has facilitated universities from East Asian countries like Taiwan, Korea, and China to value university rankings more in enhancing their admissions and reputation. Especially when Taiwan and China are all considered belonging to Chinese social community, returnee doctorates are assumed to possess international experience that is theoretically helpful to improve their research productivity and university employers generally prefer foreign-trained doctorates. However, there is little research to prove that returnee doctorates are more productive than local doctorates because of more frequent international mobility. This research examines a University in Taiwan, a prominent academic research university, credible for its research productivity. From the perspective of bibliometrics, this study used the Scopus International Academic Database to identify publications, citations, and Field Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) as credible indicators of research productivity, controlling for personal background, doctoral training, international mobility, and research collaboration. We hope that the differences in research productivity between local and returnee doctorates can be measured more comprehensively and objectively. The results of this study found that there is a significant difference in the higher FWCI score of research publications between local and returnee doctorates, and further found that there is a significant positive relationship between local doctorates, published papers during doctoral studies, prestige of supervisors, and international and domestic research collaboration on research productivity. Those that identified international mobility in careers had a stronger impact on research productivity compared to those of the doctorate educating stage, and both international and domestic research collaboration were important for research productivity. The results based on empirical analysis broke the myths of returnee doctorate corresponding to high research productivity in this study, and can serve as a reference for faculty recruitment and research environment enhancement in research-oriented universities in Taiwan and other Asian countries. Policy implications are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing emphasis on research across disciplines, and higher educational institutions' research productivity (RP) is a matter of serious consideration. However, a knowledge gap exists in RP in social science disciplines in India. In this context, the present study aimed to (1) understand the RP of social work and psychology schools at publicly funded central universities (CU) in India, (2) evaluate the RP and research impacts of faculty members in these schools, and (3) identify the publishing trends and patterns in social work and psychology disciplines. Using the Scopus database, we collected bibliometric information on publications of 19 social work and 16 psychology schools and their faculty members. The results indicate that schools' research productivity remained unpromising, constituting many faculty members (Social work 51.08%; Psychology 43.4%) with no publications. Although the average RP of social work (M= 16.0, SD = 17.40) and psychology (M= 45.63, SSD = 61.08) schools differed, the difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.88, p = .078). An increase in the publication was evident after 2016, indicating positive-policy impacts. A difference in RP across professional ranks was evident for social work (p\.05) but not for psychology (p>.05). For research impact, a difference existed based on ranks for academicians from psychology only (p\.05). Publications in high-impact journals and an output of international collaborations remained low in both disciplines. Implications point to developing appropriate workshops and training to provide hands-on experience to improve quality research among academicians. Further policy changes are also essential to enhance research culture and productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Engaging in research is a fundamental responsibility for academics since it fosters the development of new knowledge and ideas. In order to facilitate this transition, it is essential for the academics at each respective institution to shift their primary emphasis from pedagogy to include a balanced dedication to both teaching and research. Nevertheless, academic research has been shown to have suboptimal levels of output, according to many studies. Such a scenario creates concern among the universities as research is part and parcel of an academic's career, which sets a path for them to excel as a professor. Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate the many elements that have an impact on the research productivity of academics. Specifically, this study specifically investigates the potential impact of research behaviour and motivation on the research productivity of academics. This study showcases the impact of research behavior and motivation on the research productivity of university academics, based on a questionnaire survey conducted with a sample size of 192 individuals. The results of this study provide a relevant and valuable addition to the comprehension of research productivity among academics, hence offering potential insights for educational leaders within the public institutions of Malaysia. The findings of this study are expected to provide valuable insights for universities in devising ways to enhance the research productivity of their academics, as well as in determining effective means of supporting academics in fostering research productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In academia, the many benefits of publishing make continuous publication a cardinal duty of faculty members. Some members work as lone writers and others work collaboratively to come up with scholarly works. Benefits of collaboration come in form of filling gaps between the haves and the have not by academic staff. In this study, the aim was to establish whether research collaboration among academic staff was related to research productivity. More specifically, we examined whether collaboration in publication of edited books, chapters in edited books, journal articles, and conference papers by members of academic staff was related to their research productivity. Using collaboration and publication data on 41 academic staff members in the College of Education and External Studies, Makerere University, we analysed the relationship between the two. Results of the Karl Pearson's linear correlation coefficient indicated that the academic staff who collaborated were more research productive. This was true for all the four forms, individually namely; edited books, chapters in edited books, journal articles, and conference papers and in terms of aggregated four forms. This study underscores the importance of cultivating collaborative environments in academia to bolster scholarly output, which is not only to the benefit of academic staff but also to university administrators and policymakers when endorsing collaborative research initiatives and interdisciplinary cooperation. Thus, it contributes to the theoretical understanding of the subject by furnishing empirical evidence on the relationship between scientific collaboration and RP by members of academic staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]