6533b7d0fe1ef96bd125ae8c

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Coauthorship Networks and Institutional Collaboration in Revista Española de Cardiología Publications

Rafael Aleixandre-benaventFrancisco J. Valderrama-zuriánAlberto Miguel-dasitJuan Carlos Valderrama-zuriánGregorio González-alcaide

subject

Gerontologybusiness.industryInterprofessional RelationsCardiologyLibrary scienceGeneral MedicineDatabases BibliographicAuthorshipScientific productivityFuture studyInterinstitutional RelationsBibliometricsSpainHumansMedicineCooperative BehaviorPeriodicals as Topicbusiness

description

The aim of this study was to analyze the patterns of investigator and institutional collaboration in papers published in the Revista Española de Cardiología.Details of coauthorship and institutional collaboration involved in articles published in the Revista Española de Cardiología in the period 2000-2005 were recorded and a collaboration index was derived. Collaboration networks were identified using the TextToPajek and PAJEK software tools.Of the 980 papers analyzed, 95.1% had been authored by two or more individuals and 51.43% involved institutional collaboration. The overall collaboration index was 6.23 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1). There was a significant statistical relationship (P.02) between the collaboration index and the journal section in which the article was published: the Original Articles and Special Reports sections had the highest collaboration indices (mean 7.87 [2.88]; and mean 6.59 [5.02], respectively). The 44 authors who had the highest publication rates were identified. In addition, 25 coauthorship networks involving 112 investigators were observed.An analysis of collaboration networks led to the identification of a number of author networks in cardiovascular medicine in Spain, and highlighted the interrelationships between them in terms of both scientific research and scientific publications. The most significant aspect of institutional collaboration was the predominance of collaboration within institutions and within Spanish autonomous regions (i.e., 80.57% of collaborations). Possible topics for future study include an analysis of the scientific productivity of the networks identified and of changes in the pattern of collaboration over time.

https://doi.org/10.1016/s1885-5857(07)60124-8