Abstract
Nanobiopharmaceuticals is a hopeful research domain from recent scientific advances with massive marketable potential. Although some researchers have studied international collaboration from some aspects, few articles are as comprehensive as this article to consider international cooperation from so many different aspects. We lay more emphasis on international collaboration in the field of nanobiopharmaceuticals involving China. Incremental citation impact values show that in order to move forward and improve the overall competitiveness in the field, China requires to carry out more international collaboration in the field, especially with USA, Germany, and England. Startlingly, multinational collaboration does not sway Chinese citation impact as much as we anticipate in the field. China has reached the first rank in the world in terms of publication amount per year in the field in 2009. Few papers about international collaboration compare small world phenomenon. We use small world quotient to find that it is important for Chinese international co-authors to strengthen to cultivate a cooperation networks in which a node’s partners are also buddies to each other.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Calero, C., Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Tijssen, R. J. W. (2007). Research cooperation within the bio-pharmaceutical industry: Network analyses of co-publications within and between firms. Scientometrics, 71(1), 87–99.
Chen, Z. F., & Guan, J. C. (2010). The impact of small world on innovation: An empirical study of 16 countries. Journal of Informetrics, 4(2010), 97–106.
Feld, S. (1981). The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 1015–1035.
Frederiksen, L. F. (2004). Disciplinary determinants of bibliometric impact in Danish industrial research: Collaboration and visibility. Scientometrics, 61(2), 253–270.
Gaur, A., & Bhatia, A. L. (2008). Nanopharmaceuticals: An overview. Asian Journal of Experimental Sciences, 22(2), 51–62.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50(2), 199–214.
Gossart, C., & Özman, M. (2009). Co-authorship networks in social sciences: The case of Turkey. Scientometrics, 78(2), 323–345.
Guan, J. C., & Ma, N. (2007). China’s emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’. Research Policy, 36(6), 880–886.
Hullmann, A., & Meyer, M. (2003). Publications and patents in nanotechnology. An overview of previous studies and the state of the art. Scientometrics, 58(3), 507–527.
Inzelt, A., Schubert, A., & Schubert, M. (2009). Incremental citation impact due to international co-authorship in Hungarian higher education institutions. Scientometrics, 78(1), 37–43.
Jain, K. K. (2008). The handbook of nanomedicine. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press.
Jin, B. H., & Rousseau, R. (2005). China’s quantitative expansion phase: Exponential growth but low impact. In Proceedings of ISSI 2005: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics (Vols. 1–2, pp. 362–370), Stockholm, Sweden.
Kim, M. J. (2001). A bibliometric analysis of physics publications in Korea, 1994–1998. Scientometrics, 50(3), 503–521.
King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430, 311–316.
Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? BioScience, 55(5), 438–443.
Lenoir, T., & Herron, P. (2009). Tracking the current rise of Chinese pharmaceutical bionanotechnology. Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration, 4, 8.
National Science Board (NSB). (2006). Science & Engineering Indicators, Arlington, VA.
OECD. (2008). OECD reviews of innovation policy: China. Source OECD, p. 66.
Rafols, I., & Meyer, M. (2007). How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? Explorations in the specialty of molecular motors. Scientometrics, 70(3), 633–650.
Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 9(5–6), 281–291.
Takeda, Y., Mae, S., Kajikawa, Y., & Matsushima, K. (2009). Nanobiotechnology as an emerging research domain from nanotechnology: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 80(1), 25–40.
Watts, D. J. (1999). Small worlds: The dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83–104.
Acknowledgments
This research is funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project no. 70773006) and Shanghai Leading Academic Discipline Project (Project no. B210).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors have contributed equally to this work.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhao, Q., Guan, J. International collaboration of three ‘giants’ with the G7 countries in emerging nanobiopharmaceuticals. Scientometrics 87, 159–170 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0311-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0311-8