Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Productivity of CNPq Researchers from Different Fields in Biomedical Sciences: The Need for Objective Bibliometric Parameters—A Report from Brazil

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In Brazil, the CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) provides grants, funds and fellowships to productive scientists to support their investigations. They are ranked and categorized into four hierarchical levels ranging from PQ 1A (the highest) to PQ 1D (the lowest). Few studies, however, report and analyse scientific productivity in different sub-fields of Biomedical Sciences (BS), e.g., Biochemistry, Pharmacology, Biophysics and Physiology. In fact, systematic comparisons of productivity among the PQ 1 categories within the above sub-fields are lacking in the literature. Here, the scientific productivity of 323 investigators receiving PQ 1 fellowships (A to D levels) in these sub-fields of BS was investigated. The Scopus database was used to compile the total number of articles, citations, h-index values and authorship positions (first-, co- or last-listed author) in the most cited papers by researchers granted CNPq fellowships. We found that researchers from Pharmacology had the best performance for all of the parameters analysed, followed by those in Biochemistry. There was great variability in scientific productivity within the PQ 1A level in all of the sub-fields of BS, but not within the other levels (1B, 1C and 1D). Analysis of the most cited papers of PQ 1(A–D) researchers in Pharmacology revealed that the citations of researchers in the 1C and 1D levels were associated with publications with their senior supervisors, whereas those in the 1B level were less connected with their supervisors in comparison to those in 1A. Taken together, these findings suggest that the scientific performance of PQ 1A researchers in BS is not homogenous. In our opinion, parameters such as the most cited papers without the involvement of Ph.D. and/or post-doctoral supervisors should be used to make decisions regarding any given researcher’s fellowship award level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bar-Ilan, J. (2010). Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 82(3), 495–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertoli-Barsotti, L., & Lando, T. (2017). The h-index as an almost-exact function of some basic statistics. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2508-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boring, P., Flanagan, K., Gagliardi, D., Kaloudis, A., & Karakasidou, A. (2015). International mobility: Findings from a survey of researchers in the EU. Science and Public Policy, 42(6), 811–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Camargo, K. R. (2013). Scientific output: Quality assessment or an accountant’s tale? Caderno de Saúde Pública, 29(9), 1707–1711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Meis, L., Do Carmo, M. S., & De Meis, C. (2003a). Impact factors: Just part of a research treadmill. Nature, 424(6950), 723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Meis, L., Velloso, A., Lannes, D., Carmo, M. S., & de Meis, C. (2003b). The growing competition in Brazilian science: Rites of passage, stress and burnout. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 36(9), 1135–1141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeter, M. (2017). Author productivity index: Without distortions. Science and Engineering Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9954-7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díaz-faes, A. A., Costas, R., Galindo, M. P., & BorDons, M. (2015). Unravelling the performance of individual scholars: Use of canonial biplot analysis to explore the performance of scientists by academic rank and scientific field. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 722–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diniz-Filho, J. A. F., Fioravanti, M. C. S., Bini, L. M., & Rangel, T. F. (2016). Drivers of academic performance in Brazilian University under a government-restructuring program. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, C., Zhang, J., & Qiu, W. (2017). Online classified advertising: A review and bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2524-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freitas, M. H. A. (1998). Some criteria for the evaluation of scientific production. Psicologia Escolar e Educacional, 2(3), 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Génova, G., Astudillo, H., & Fraga, A. (2016). The scientometric bubble considered harmful. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(1), 227–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, J. E., & Buela-Casal, G. (2014). The meaning of the h-index. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(2), 161–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia, Z. J., Hong, B., Chen, D. M., Huang, Q. H., Yang, Z. G., Yin, C., et al. (2014). China’s growing contribution to global Intracranial aneurysm research (1991–2012): A bibliometric study. PLoS ONE, 9, e91594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamdem, J. P., Abolaji, A. O., Roos, D. H., Calabró, L., Barbosa, N. V., Souza, D. O., et al. (2016). Scientific performance of Brazilian researchers in pharmacology with grants from CNPq: A comparative study within the Brazilian categories. Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, 88(3), 1735–1742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamdem, J. P., Fidelis, K. R., Nunes, R. G. S., Araujo, I. F., Elekofehinti, O. O., Cunha, F. A. B., et al. (2017). Comparative research performance of top universities from the northeastern Brazil on three pharmacological disciplines as seen in scopus database. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2017.03.003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellner, A. W. A., & Ponciano, L. C. M. O. (2008). H-index in the Brazilian Academy of Sciences—Comments and concerns. Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, 80(4), 771–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mêgnigbêto, E. (2013). International collaboration in scientific publishing: The case of West Africa (2001–2010). Scientometrics, 96(3), 761–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meneghini, R. (2011). Citations to papers from Brazilian institutions: A more effective indicator to assess productivity and the impact of research in graduate programs. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 84(8), 738–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mugnaini, R., Packer, A. L., & Meneghini, R. (2008). Comparison of scientist of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA on the basis of the h-index. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 41(4), 258–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawat, S., & Meena, S. (2014). Publish or perish: Where we are heading? Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 19(2), 87–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roos, D. H., Calabró, L., De Jesus, S. L., Souza, D. O., Barbosa, N. V., & Rocha, J. B. T. (2014). Brazilian scientific production in areas of biological sciences: A comparative study on the modalities of full doctorate in Brazil or abroad. Scientometrics, 98(1), 415–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strehl, L., Calabró, L., Souza, D. O., Amaral, L., Bornmann, L. (2016). Brazilian science between national and foreign journals: Methodology for analyzing the production and impact in emerging scientific communities. PLOS ONE, 11(5), e0155148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson Reuters. (2013). Thomson Reuters statement regarding the San Francisco declaration on research assessment. http://researchanalytics.thomsonreuters.com/statement_re_sfdra/. Accessed 23 October 2014.

  • Tsay, M., & Li, C. (2017). Bibliometric analysis of the journal literature on women’s studies. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2493-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasconcelos, S. M. R., Steneck, N. H., Anderson, M., Masuda, H., Palacios, M., Pinto, J. C. S., et al. (2012). The new geography of scientific collaborations. EMBO Report, 13(5), 404–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grants from UFRGS (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul), UFSM (Universidade Federal de Santa Maria), CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior), CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico), CNPq-TWAS (The World Academy of Sciences), Alexander von Humboldt (AvH) foundation, FAPERGS (Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul), FINEP (Rede Instituto Brasileiro de Neurociência), and INCT-EN (Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Excitotoxicidade e Neuroproteção). Dr. Kiven Erique Lukong from the University of Saskatchewan, Canada, is welcome for English editing of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde-CCBS, Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Regional do Cariri (URCA), Pimenta, Crato, CE, CEP 63105-000, Brazil

    Jean Paul Kamdem, Luiz Marivando Barros & Antonia Eliene Duarte

  2. PGP Education in Science, Chemistry of Life and Health, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, CEP 90035-003, Brazil

    Jean Paul Kamdem, Luciana Calabró & Diogo Onofre Souza

  3. Departamento de Bioquímica e Biologia Molecular, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil

    Jean Paul Kamdem, Cláudia Sirlene de Oliveira, Nilda Vargas Barbosa & João Batista Teixeira Rocha

  4. Universidade Federal do Pampa-UNIPAMPA, Campus Uruguaiana BR-472 km 7, Uruguaiana, RS, CEP 97500-970, Brazil

    Daniel Henrique Roos

  5. Department of Biochemistry, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, PMB 4000, Ogbomoso, Nigeria

    Adekunle Adeniran Sanmi

  6. Drug Metabolism and Molecular Toxicology Research Laboratories, Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria

    Amos Olalekan Abolaji

Authors
  1. Jean Paul Kamdem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Henrique Roos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adekunle Adeniran Sanmi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luciana Calabró
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Amos Olalekan Abolaji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Cláudia Sirlene de Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Luiz Marivando Barros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Antonia Eliene Duarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Nilda Vargas Barbosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Diogo Onofre Souza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. João Batista Teixeira Rocha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jean Paul Kamdem or João Batista Teixeira Rocha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kamdem, J.P., Roos, D.H., Sanmi, A.A. et al. Productivity of CNPq Researchers from Different Fields in Biomedical Sciences: The Need for Objective Bibliometric Parameters—A Report from Brazil. Sci Eng Ethics 25, 1037–1055 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0025-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0025-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation