BibTex format
@article{Patel:2019:10.1177/0141076819851666,
author = {Patel, VM and Panzarasa, P and Ashrafian, H and Evans, TS and Kirresh, A and Sevdalis, N and Darzi, A and Athanasiou, T},
doi = {10.1177/0141076819851666},
journal = {Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine},
pages = {245--257},
title = {Collaborative patterns, authorship practices and scientific success in biomedical research: a network analysis.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0141076819851666},
volume = {112},
year = {2019}
}
RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)
TY - JOUR
AB - OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between biomedical researchers' collaborative and authorship practices and scientific success. DESIGN: Longitudinal quantitative analysis of individual researchers' careers over a nine-year period. SETTING: A leading biomedical research institution in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred and twenty-five biomedical researchers who were in employment on 31 December 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We constructed the co-authorship network in which nodes are the researchers, and links are established between any two researchers if they co-authored one or more articles. For each researcher, we recorded the position held in the co-authorship network and in the bylines of all articles published in each three-year interval and calculated the number of citations these articles accrued until January 2013. We estimated maximum likelihood negative binomial panel regression models. RESULTS: Our analysis suggests that collaboration sustained success, yet excessive co-authorship did not. Last positions in non-alphabetised bylines were beneficial for higher academic ranks but not for junior ones. A professor could witness a 20.57% increase in the expected citation count if last-listed non-alphabetically in one additional publication; yet, a lecturer suffered from a 13.04% reduction. First positions in alphabetised bylines were positively associated with performance for junior academics only. A lecturer could experience a 8.78% increase in the expected citation count if first-listed alphabetically in one additional publication. While junior researchers amplified success when brokering among otherwise disconnected collaborators, senior researchers prospered from socially cohesive networks, rich in third-party relationships. CONCLUSIONS: These results help biomedical scientists shape successful careers and research institutions develop effective assessment and recruitment policies that will ultimately sustain the quality of biomedical r
AU - Patel,VM
AU - Panzarasa,P
AU - Ashrafian,H
AU - Evans,TS
AU - Kirresh,A
AU - Sevdalis,N
AU - Darzi,A
AU - Athanasiou,T
DO - 10.1177/0141076819851666
EP - 257
PY - 2019///
SN - 1758-1095
SP - 245
TI - Collaborative patterns, authorship practices and scientific success in biomedical research: a network analysis.
T2 - Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0141076819851666
UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31163118
UR - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0141076819851666
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/71719
VL - 112
ER -
