1 / 24

June 29th, 2012

The scientific p roduction of NOVA: evolvement and prospects Update of the bibliometric study of NOVA. June 29th, 2012. Bibliometric analysis. Main objectives:

teness
Download Presentation

June 29th, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The scientific production of NOVA: evolvement and prospectsUpdate of the bibliometric study of NOVA June 29th, 2012

  2. Bibliometricanalysis • Main objectives: • Assess the impact of NOVA publications (articles, letters, reviews) in journals indexed to WoS and compare with the results of the previous studies (2000-06 & 2002-08) • Identify areas of excellence, strengths, and weaknesses • Benchmark NOVA with other Portuguese and European Universities • Map collaborative research and design instruments for research management

  3. WoS “coverage” of NOVA andunits Solid conclusions can be withdrawn for the majority of the Natural and Exact Sciences, where the coverage of Web of Science is excellent

  4. WoS “coverage” of FCT departments

  5. Production and normalized impact * percentages are relative to 2000-2006 CPP/FCSm, Field Normalized Citation Impact - this indicator compares the average number of citations excluding self-citations (CPP) obtained by a research unit to the international reference value (FCSm, the mean field(s) citation score). It is a normalized indicator that corrects for differences in “citation habits” among scientific areas MNCS, Mean Normalized Citation Score – New indicator that replaced CPP/FCSm in 2010. It is also a normalized indicator, but the calculation method is different If CPP/FCSm or MNCS values are between 0.8-1.2 the impact is similar to the international average. A value >1.2 means that the impact is above average

  6. Evolution of impact The impact of NOVA publications has been increasing and reached 1.05 in 2007-2010

  7. Highly-cited papers (2004-2008) Top20% - 559 (9% lower than expected) Top10% - 283 (9% lower) Top5% - 133 (14% lower) Top1% - 35 (13% higher) – 17 with corresponding author from UNL ** 2004-2008 paperscounted in 5 years; allother data corresponds to 4 years

  8. Scientificareasof highest impact and production IMPACT PRODUCTION Arrowsidentifyareaswithsignificant output (>200) andimpactclose / aboveinternationalaverage: BiologicalSciences-Animals & Plants (1.51), Chemistry (1.17), Geosciences (1.07), AppliedPhysics & Chemistry (1.03), Clinical Medicine (0.99), BiologicalSciences-Humans (0.97), Engineering (0.94)

  9. Subfields of highest impact and production

  10. Units: output and normalized impact (CPP/FCSm)

  11. Conclusions Thenumberofpublicationsincreased 39% from 3350 in 2000-2006 to 4671 in 2004-2010 Thefieldnormalizedcitationimpactof NOVA, CPP/FCSm, increased 13% from 0.87 in 2000-2006 to 0.98 in 2004-2010. TheMeanNormalizedCitation Score, MNCS, increasedfrom 0.95 to 1.02 Thenumberofhighlycitedpapershasbeenincreasingconsistently Theimpactisaboveinternationalaverage (>1.2) for 8 subfields: AppliedPhysics; Material SciCeramics; ChemicalEng; FoodSci & Technol; PlantSci; PhysicalChemistry; Elect & ElectrEng; MultidiscChem Theimpactof ITQB/IBET isclearlyaboveworldaverage (1.1) Theimpactof FCT, Nova SBE, IHMT, FCM and ISEGI isclose to average (≥ 0.9) FCSH has a significantincrease in impactwhencomparingwith 2000-2006 buttheindicators are stillbasedon a relativelylownumberofpublications

  12. Benchmarking

  13. Benchmark universities Portugal Porto Lisboa Técnica de Lisboa Coimbra Aveiro Minho Algarve Belgium Katholieque Univ Leuven Libre Bruxelles Switzerland ETH Zurich Germany Stuttgart Technical Univ Dresden Austria Technical Univ Wien Greece Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki Spain Granada Sevilha Autónoma Barcelona France Toulouse 3 Paul Sabatier Paris 5 René Descartes Italy Perugia Poland Krakov Ireland Dublin City Univ United kingdom Bath Southampton Leeds Finland Helsinki Turku Abo Akademi Univ Denmark Aarhus Univ of Southern Denmark The Netherlands Utrecht Twente Norway Bergen Norwegian Univ of Sci & Technol Trondheim Czech Republic Masaryk Univ Brno

  14. NOVA vs 35 benchmark universities: main scientific areas

  15. NOVA vs univs PT: main scientific areas

  16. NOVA vs 35 benchmark universities: subfields with highest impact at NOVA • The impact of UNL is significantly above* the benchmark universities in: • Applied Physics • Mat Sci, Ceramics • Chemical Eng • Elec & Electr Eng • Physical Chemistry * Differences in impacthigherthan 0.15

  17. NOVA vsPortugal: subfields with highest impact at NOVA • The impact of UNL is significantly above* the impact of Portugal in: • Applied Physics • Mat Sci, Ceramics • Chemical Eng • Elec & Electr Eng • Plant Sciences • Physical Chemistry • Multidisc Chemistry • Parasitology • Microbiology • Organic Chemistry • Applied Mathematics * Differences in impacthigherthan 0.15

  18. Ranking: position of NOVA among 365 top world universities universitiesthatproduce more than 700 publications per yearindexed to Web ofScience

  19. Ranking basedonimpact (2004-2010) andcomparisonwith 2000-2006 World Top51-75BiolSci Animals & Plants - Ranked66 ↑ World Top126-150 Humanities & Arts - Ranked 140 ↑ World Top176-270in 9 areas: Economics - Ranked189↑ Chemistry - 221↑ Geosciences - 226↑ Other Social Sci - 235↑ Social Sci Medicine - 242↑ AppliedPhysics & Chemistry - 249 ↑ MultidisciplinarySci - 259 ↑ Engineering - 265 ↑ BiolSciHumans - 269↓ Rank in 2004-2010 andchange in positioncompared to 2000-2006

  20. Research collaboration at NOVA

  21. Research Collaboration External collaboration, in particular international collaboration, is extremely relevant and with high impact

  22. Collaboration between NOVA units (2004-2010) 253 (5.4% of total publications) with FCT / Total = 86.1% FCT-ITQB / Total = 61.7%

  23. Collaboration between FCT departments 2004-2010 236 - 9.4% of total FCT publications Multiple research cultures within FCT

  24. Research collaboration – comparison with 2000-2006 2000-2006 intra UNL – 194 (5.8% of total publications) intra FCT – 192 (10.0% of FCT publications) 2004-2010 intra UNL – 253 (5.4% of total publications) intra FCT – 236 (9.4% of FCT publications) How to promote a culture of collaborative and transdisciplinar research at NOVA?

More Related