Article in HTML

Author(s): Mahendra Kumar Patel, Maya Verma

Email(s): mahendra23kumar@gmail.com , verma_maya64@rediffmail.com

Address: SoS in Library and Information Science, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur (C.G) 492010
SoS in Library and Information Science, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur (C.G) 492010
*Corresponding author: Mahendra Kumar Patel (mahendra23kumar@gmail.com)

Published In:   Volume - 30,      Issue - 2,     Year - 2024


Cite this article:
Patel and Verma (2024). Authorship pattern and Degree of collaboration in the field of Diabetes Research output in India: A Scientometric analysis. Journal of Ravishankar University (Part-A: SOCIAL-SCIENCE), 30(2), pp.55-63. DOI:



Authorship pattern and Degree of collaboration in the field of Diabetes Research output in India: A Scientometric analysis

Mahendra Kumar Patel1, Maya Verma2

1SoS in Library and Information Science, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur (C.G) 492010

1mahendra23kumar@gmail.com, 2verma_maya64@rediffmail.com 

*Corresponding author: Mahendra Kumar Patel (mahendra23kumar@gmail.com)

Abstract:

Diabetes is one of the most prevalent diseases in India and has been a major cause of concern for many years. It is important to measure the author productivity of diabetes research in India. This paper will explore the trends in author productivity related to diabetes research in India over the past few years. This study focused on analyzing Diabetic research published via Web of Science (2018-2020). The results show that a total of 9185 papers were published. The year 2017 had the greatest number of publications, with 745 total documents. The analysis reveals that Journal articles constituted 8577 (93.381%) of total documents of source, followed by Website 406 (4.420%), Books 151 (1.644%), and respectively. Among all authors, V Mohan has published 164 outputs from Madras Diabetes Research Foundation, Chennai, followed by A Misra with 89 outputs in the field of diabetes research. The degree of collaboration is found to be 0.918 from 1938 to 2020 and found multiauthor dominating. The result of this study found that Indian authors contributed more articles on diabetes research and should be encouraged to contribute further works in this field.

Keywords: Diabetes, Scientometric, Authorship pattern, Author Productivity, Publication, Degree of collaboration, Web of Science, etc.

 

1.     Introduction

Diabetes is a condition that impairs the body’s ability to process blood glucose, otherwise known as blood sugar. There are several types of diabetes, which have various treatments. Without ongoing, careful management, diabetes can lead to a buildup of sugars in the blood, which can increase the risk of dangerous complications, including stroke and heart disease. Different kinds of diabetes can occur, and how people manage the condition depends on the type. Not all forms of diabetes stem from a person being overweight or leading an inactive lifestyle. Some are present from childhood.

The most common types of diabetes include type 1, type 2, and gestational diabetes, which we cover in more detail below. Less common types of diabetes include monogenic diabetes and cystic fibrosis-related diabetes.(Diabetes: Symptoms, Treatment, Prevention, and Early Diagnosis)

An estimated 30.3 million people in the United States, or 9.4 percent of the population, have diabetes. About one in four people with diabetes don't know they have the disease. An estimated 84.1 million Americans aged 18 years or older have prediabetes.(Patel and Verma)

Scientometrics and bibliometrics are methodological approaches in which the scientific literature itself becomes the subject of analysis. In a sense, they could be considered a science of science. Scientometrics researchers often attempt to measure the evolution of a scientific domain, the impact of scholarly publications, the patterns of authorship, and the process of scientific knowledge production. Scientometrics and bibliometrics often involve the monitoring of research, the assessment of the scientific contribution of authors, journals, or specific works, as well as the analysis of the dissemination process of scientific knowledge. (What Are Scientometrics and Bibliometrics? - Provalis Research)

Modern scientometrics is mostly based on the work of Derek J. de Solla Price and Eugene Garfield. The latter created the Science Citation Index and founded the Institute for Scientific Information which is heavily used for scientometric analysis. A dedicated academic journal, Scientometrics, was established in 1978. The industrialization of science increased the quantity of publications and research outcomes and the rise of the computers allowed effective analysis of this data. While the sociology of science focused on the behavior of scientists, scientometrics focused on the analysis of publications. Accordingly, scientometrics is also referred to as the scientific and empirical study of science and its outcomes. (Short Note on Scientometrics | Research Methodology | Library and Information Science)

 

2.     Review of Literature

Nasrin Poly Tahmina, Mohaimenul Islam Md, et al. (2023) conducted a bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence (AI) research related to diabetic retinopathy (DR) between 2012 and 2022. The analysis includes information on the growth rate of publications, top countries, journals, institutes, and authors, as well as the co-occurrence of keywords and reference co-citation analysis. The study analyzed a total of 931 articles on artificial intelligence (AI) for diabetic retinopathy (DR) published between 2012 and 2022. The top 10 most productive authors in AI research for DR were identified, with Ting D. ranking first among all authors. The top 10 countries in terms of publication output were the People's Republic of China, India, USA, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, and Italy. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, IEEE Access, and Computers in Biology and Medicine were the top contributing journals in this field. The number of publications in this field has been steadily increasing, with a significant growth rate observed in recent years.(Poly et al.)

Patel, Sina, and Khedkar, Vijayshri Nitin (2021) examine the trend in publications, authors, countries, and institutions from Scopus and Web of Science databases to develop a global picture of diabetes prediction research nationally and internationally. The analysis was enhanced further by checking network indicators such as co-authorship, collaborative countries, citation analysis, and keyword occurrence. (Khedkar and Patel)

Oliveira, Patricia Simplicio, et al. (2020) evaluated a bibliometric study using a sample of 85 articles published in Scielo, Lilacs, Medline, and Scopus. The articles were mainly published in international journals, including the Diabetes Educator Journal and national journals, distributed to nurse researchers. Of 51 (67.1%) authors, 51 are nurses, 53 are doctors, and 78 (91.8%) studies are original. Brazil had the most significant number of studies, 33 (39.1%).(Oliveira et al.)

Rondan, Alvaro Taype, et al. (2017) analyze the scientific production related to diabetes in Peru between 1996 and 2015. From 1996 to 2015, papers about diabetes published in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) and Scopus databases were identified by Peruvian authors. The results indicated that 75.3% of the 81 articles were original articles, no intervention was evaluated, foreign sources funded 60.7% of the articles, 55.6% had an author associated with the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH), 65.4% had a foreign author.(Taype-Rondan et al.)

Varadarajulu, Rachel, et al. (2013) studies the research productivity regarding psychosocial aspects of diabetes from India. Using the terms 'psychosocial', 'diabetes' in any field, and 'India' in the author affiliation field, a search had carried out in PUBMED online database. There are 16 articles available in PubMed related to the psychosocial impact of diabetes, constituting only 0.08% of all articles in the database. There were primarily original articles (13 out of 16), and the remainder was a case report, review, and medical hypothesis. Most of the articles had made by authors from Delhi, Chennai, and Visakhapatnam. (Varadarajulu et al.)

 

3.     Objectives

The specific studies of the objectives are:

1.     To find out the year-wise distribution in diabetes research.

2.     To find out the document-wise distribution of diabetes literature.

3.     To find out the authorship pattern of publication.

4.     To find out the degree of collaboration.

5.     To find out the prolific author in diabetes research.

 

4.     Methodology

The scientometric analysis was carried out to identify the research productivity of diabetes in India. The data was retrieved from the Web of Science database from 2018 to 2020. The references from the articles have taken for analysis. For collecting data, the search term "Diabetes" is used and country and year filters are applied (ALL FIELD-KEY “DIABETES”, PUB. COUNTRY- INDIA, PUB. YEAR- 2018-2020). There are 9185 records in total, which have been collected, imported into MS-Office and Excel, analyzed, and presented in table and chart format. Author productivity and Degree of collaboration have also been calculated.

 

5.     Data Analysis and Interpretation

5.1  Year-wise distribution of diabetes research

Table No-01: Year-wise distribution

Sl.No

Year

No. of Records

Percentage

Sl.No

Year

No. of Records

Percentage

1

1938

1

0.011

37

1986

18

0.196

2

1940

1

0.011

38

1987

12

0.131

3

1950

1

0.011

39

1988

24

0.261

4

1951

5

0.054

40

1989

17

0.185

5

1952

1

0.011

41

1990

23

0.250

6

1954

1

0.011

42

1991

33

0.359

7

1955

1

0.011

43

1992

29

0.316

8

1956

2

0.022

44

1993

33

0.359

9

1957

1

0.011

45

1994

43

0.468

10

1958

1

0.011

46

1995

40

0.435

11

1959

5

0.054

47

1996

65

0.708

12

1960

2

0.022

48

1997

57

0.621

13

1961

3

0.033

49

1998

83

0.904

14

1962

3

0.033

50

1999

70

0.762

15

1963

1

0.011

51

2000

148

1.611

16

1964

1

0.011

52

2001

180

1.960

17

1965

4

0.044

53

2002

201

2.188

18

1966

2

0.022

54

2003

203

2.210

19

1967

2

0.022

55

2004

281

3.059

20

1969

1

0.011

56

2005

245

2.667

21

1970

3

0.033

57

2006

278

3.027

22

1971

3

0.033

58

2007

306

3.332

23

1972

13

0.142

59

2008

368

4.007

24

1973

1

0.011

60

2009

357

3.887

25

1974

10

0.109

61

2010

442

4.812

26

1975

6

0.065

62

2011

464

5.052

27

1976

5

0.054

63

2012

479

5.215

28

1977

9

0.098

64

2013

619

6.739

29

1978

4

0.044

65

2014

605

6.587

30

1979

6

0.065

66

2015

637

6.935

31

1980

7

0.076

67

2016

664

7.229

32

1981

13

0.142

68

2017

745

8.111

33

1982

14

0.152

69

2018

640

6.968

34

1983

8

0.087

70

2019

313

3.408

35

1984

11

0.120

71

2020

283

3.081

36

1985

28

0.305

TOTAL

 

9185

100.00

Table no-01 and figure no-01 show that year-wise distribution of publication of diabetes research output from 1938 to 2020, a total of 9185 were published. The highest number of publications, 745 (8.111%), were published in 2017, followed by 2016, i.e., 664 (7.229%) publications. The 2018 were 640 (6.968%) followed by 2015 i.e., 637 (6.935%) publications. The lowest publication number was in 1938, i.e., 1 (0.011%). The study reveals the highest number of articles published in 2017, i.e., 745 (7.229%).

 

5.2  Document-wise distribution of publications

Table No-02: Document-wise distribution

Source

No. of Records

Percentage

Journal Article

8577

93.381

Website

406

4.42

Books

151

1.644

Reports

19

0.207

Conference Proceeding

16

0.174

News

4

0.044

Thesis

3

0.033

Review

2

0.022

Dictionary

2

0.022

E-book

2

0.022

Encyclopaedia

1

0.011

Magazine

1

0.011

Database

1

0.011

TOTAL

9185

100

 

Table no-01 and figure no-01 show the document-wise distribution of publications, including Journal articles, Websites, Books, Conference Proceedings, Reports, News, Reviews, Thesis, dictionaries, Encyclopedia, E-book, magazines, and Databases. The analysis found that 8577 publications based on the Web of Science revealed that journal articles occupy the predominant position sharing 93.381%. The other source is website 406 (4.420%), followed by books 151 (1.644%), conference proceedings 16 (0.174%), and followed by other sources of publications.

5.3 Authorship pattern of publication

Table No-03:  Authorship pattern

Sl. No

Authors

No. of Records

Percentage

1

Single author

535

6.238

2

Two authors

887

10.342

3

Three authors

910

10.610

4

Multiple author

5991

69.850

5

Author name not mentioned

254

2.961

Total

8577

100

Table no-03 and figure no-03 show the authorship pattern of publication. The analysis found that multiple authors contribute more publications than a single author. Multiple authors contribute 6991 (69.850%) publications followed by Three authors contribute 910 (10.610%), Two authors 887 (10.342%) and the least number of contributions is by Single author, i.e., 535 (6.238%) publications.

5.4 Degree of Collaboration

Various methods have been the degree methods proposed to calculate the degree of research collaboration. Here in this study the formula proposed by Subramanyam (1983) has been used.(Khaparde Professor and Pawar)

The degree of collaboration C = Nm

                                                  Ns+ Nm

Where, C = Degree of collaboration in a discipline

 Nm = number of multi authored papers in the discipline

 Ns = number of single papers in the discipline

Here,   Nm = 5991

            Ns   = 535

            C = 5991         = 0.918

                5991+535

Thus, the degree of collaboration (C) from 1938 to 2020 is 0.918.

Year wise degree of collaboration

Sl. No

Year

Ns

Nm

Ns+Nm

Dc

Sl. No

Year

Ns

Nm

Ns+Nm

Dc

1

1938

1

-

1

0