Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Characteristics of research in China assessed with Essential Science Indicators

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To provide an overview of the characteristics of research in China, a bibliometric evaluation of highly cited papers with high-level representation was conducted during the period from 1999 to 2009 based on the Essential Science Indicators (ESI) database. A comprehensive assessment covered overall performance, journals, subject categories, internationally collaborative countries, national inter-institutionally collaborative institutions, and most-cited papers in 22 scientific fields. China saw a strong growth in scientific publications in the last decade, to some extent due to increasing research and development expenditure. China has been more active in ESI fields of chemistry and physics, but more excellent in materials science, engineering and mathematics. Most publications were concerned with the common Science Citation Index subject categories of multidisciplinary chemistry, multidisciplinary materials and science, and physical chemistry. About one half China’s ESC papers were internationally collaborative and the eight major industrialized countries (the USA, Germany, the UK, Japan, France, Canada, Russia, and Italy) played a prominent role in scientific collaboration with China, especially the USA. The Chinese Academy of Sciences took the leading position of institutions with many branches. The “985 Project” stimulated the most productive institutions for academic research with a huge funding injection and the universities in Hong Kong showed good scientific performance. The citation impact of internationally collaborative papers differed among fields and international collaborations made positive contributions to academic research in China.

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

  • Aksnes, D. W. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12, 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, J. A. S., Pais, A. A. C. C., & Formosinho, S. J. (2009). Science indicators and science patterns in Europe. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 134–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arunachalam, S., Singh, U. N., & Sinha, R. (1993). The sleeping dragon wakes up: A scientometric analysis of the growth of science and the usage of journals in China. Current science, 65, 809–822.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltussen, A., & Kindler, C. H. (2004). Citation classics in critical care medicine. Intensive Care Medicine, 30, 902–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, T. J., Chen, Y. C., Hwang, S. J., & Chou, L. F. (2007). The rise of China in gastroenterology? A bibliometric analysis of ISI and Medline databases. Scientometrics, 69, 539–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, W. T., & Ho, Y. S. (2005). Bibliometric analysis of homeopathy research during the period of 1991 to 2003. Scientometrics, 63, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, B., Snyder, H., & Atkins, H. (1997). Comparative citation rankings of authors in monographic and journal literature: A study of sociology. Journal of Documentation, 53, 263–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Haan, J. (1997). Authorship patterns in Dutch sociology. Scientometrics, 39, 197–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fu, H. Z., Ho, Y. S., Sui, Y. M., & Li, Z. S. (2010). A bibliometric analysis of solid waste research during the period 1993–2008. Waste Management, 30, 2410–2417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E., & Pudovkina, A. I. (2003). From materials science to nano-ceramics: Citation analysis identifies the key journals and players. Journal of Ceramic Processing Research, 4, 155–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E., & Welljams-Dorof, A. (1992). Citation data: Their use as quantitative indicators for science and technology evaluation and policy-making. Current Contents, 49, 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (1996). A bibliometric approach to social sciences. National research performances in 6 selected social science areas, 1990–1992. Scientometrics, 35, 291–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2000). Science in Scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 48, 121–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (2002). A relational charting approach to the world of basic research in twelve science fields at the end of the second millennium. Scientometrics, 55, 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J., & Gao, X. (2008). Comparison and evaluation of Chinese research performance in the field of bioinformatics. Scientometrics, 75, 357–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C., & Ma, N. (2007a). China’s emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology—A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’. Research Policy, 36, 880–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C., & Ma, N. (2007b). A bibliometric study of China’s semiconductor literature compared with other major Asian countries. Scientometrics, 70, 107–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpenny, D., Burke, J., McNeill, G., Snow, A., & Torreggiani, W. C. (2010). Geographic origin of publications in radiological journals as a function of GDP and percentage of GDP spent on research. Academic Radiology, 17, 768–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannerz, M. (2010). Top-cited articles 2001–2009. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 25, 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, T. W. (2009). International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries. Scientometrics, 80, 571–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, Y. S., Satoh, H., & Lin, S. Y. (2010). Japanese lung cancer research trends and performances in Science Citation Index. Internal Medicine, 49, 2219–2228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoeffel, C. (1998). Journal impact factors. Allergy, 53(12), 1225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, W. H., Chiu, W. T., Lee, Y. S., & Ho, Y. S. (2004). Bibliometric analysis of patent ductus arteriosus treatments. Scientometrics, 60, 205–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, J., Ma, Y. W., Zhang, L., Gan, F. X., & Ho, Y. S. (2010). A historical review and bibliometric analysis of research on lead in drinking water field from 1991 to 2007. Science of the Total Environment, 408, 1738–1744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, K. G. (2010). China’s innovation landscape. Science, 329, 632–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeenah, M., & Pouris, A. (2008). South African research in the context of Africa and globally. South African Journal of Science, 104, 351–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin, B., & Rousseau. R. (2005). China’s quantitative expansion phase: Exponential growth but low impact. In: Ingwersen, P., & Larsen, B. (Eds.) ISSI 2005: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics (pp. 362–370). Stockholm, Sweden: Karolinska University Press, 1–2.

  • Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1997). How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics, 40, 541–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Z., & Ho, Y. S. (2008). Use of citation per publication as an indicator to evaluate contingent valuation research. Scientometrics, 75, 97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. F., Zhang, Y. H., Wang, X. S., & Ho, Y. S. (2009a). Bibliometric analysis of atmospheric simulation trends in meteorology and atmospheric science journals. Croatica Chemica Acta, 82, 695–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, L. L., Ding, G. H., Feng, N., Wang, M. H., & Ho, Y. S. (2009b). Global stem cell research trend: Bibliometric analysis as a tool for mapping of trends from 1991 to 2006. Scientometrics, 80, 41–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malarvizhi, R., Wang, M. H., & Ho, Y. S. (2010). Research trends in adsorption technologies for dye containing wastewaters. World Applied Sciences Journal, 8, 930–942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mao, N., Wang, M. H., & Ho, Y. S. (2010). A bibliometric study of the trend in articles related to risk assessment published in Science Citation Index. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 16, 801–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R., & Irvine, J. (1983). Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy, 12, 61–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mervis, J. (2010). Science Indicators. Trends document China’s prowess. Science, 327, 407–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Burger, W. J. M., Frankfort, J. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1985). The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy, 14, 131–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., de Bruin, R. E., & Van Leeuwen, T. H. N. (1995). New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics, 33, 381–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paladugu, R., Schein, M., Gardezi, S., & Wise, L. (2002). One hundred citation classics in general surgical journals. World Journal of Surgery, 26, 1099–1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, O. (2010). Are highly cited papers more international? Scientometrics, 83, 397–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponce, F. A., & Lozano, A. M. (2010). Highly cited works in neurosurgery. Part I: The 100 top-cited papers in neurosurgical journals. A review. Journal of Neurosurgery, 112, 223–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouris, A. (1989). Strengths and weaknesses of South African science. South African Journal of Science, 85, 623–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouris, A. (2007). The international performance of the South African academic institutions: A citation assessment. Higher Education, 54, 501–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehn, C., Kronman, U., & Wadskog, D. (2007). Bibliometric indicators—definitions and usage at Karolinska Institutet. Karolinska Institutet.

  • Rinia, E. J., van Leeuwen, T. H. N., van Vuren, H. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria: Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands. Research Policy, 27, 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1990). International collaboration in the sciences, 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 19, 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., Glänzel, W., & Braun, T. (1989). Scientometric datafiles: A comprehensive set of indicators on 2649 journals and 96 countries in all major science fields and subfields 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 16, 3–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, F., & Fang, Y. C. (2007). Citation data analysis on hydrogeology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 518–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seng, L. B., & Willett, P. (1995). The citedness of publications by United-Kingdom library-schools. Journal of Information Science, 21, 68–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadgan, B., Roig, M., HajGhanbari, B., & Reid, W. D. (2010). Top-cited articles in rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91, 806–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soteriades, E. S., & Falagas, M. E. (2005). Comparison of amount of biomedical research originating from the European Union and the United States. British Medical Journal, 331, 192–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vinkler, P. (1988). An attempt of surveying and classifying bibliometric indicators for scientometric purposes. Scientometrics, 13, 239–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. H., Yu, T. C., & Ho, Y. S. (2010). A bibliometric analysis of the performance of Water Research. Scientometrics, 84, 813–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamazaki, S. (1994). Research activities in life sciences in Japan. Scientometrics, 29, 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L., Wang, M. H., Hu, J., & Ho, Y. S. (2010). A review of published wetland research, 1991–2008: Ecological engineering and ecosystem restoration. Ecological Engineering, 36, 973–980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, P., & Glanzel, W. (2010). In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science. Scientometrics, 82, 597–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35, 83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2008). China ranks second in scientific publications since 2006. ISSI Newletter, 4, 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Chemistry in China—A bibliometric view. Chimica Oggi-Chemistry Today, 27, 19–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, F., Guo, H. C., Ho, Y. S., & Wu, C. Z. (2007). Scientometric analysis of geostatistics using multivariate methods. Scientometrics, 73, 265–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Engineering, Peking University, 100871, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

    Hui-Zhen Fu

  2. Department of Public Health, Taipei Medical University, 250 Wu-Hsing Street, Taipei, 11014, Taiwan

    Kun-Yang Chuang

  3. Department of Environmental Sciences, The Key Laboratory of Water and Sediment Sciences, Ministry of Education, Peking University, 100871, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

    Ming-Huang Wang & Yuh-Shan Ho

  4. Trend Research Centre, Asia University, No. 500, Lioufeng Road, Wufeng, Taichung County, 41354, Taiwan

    Yuh-Shan Ho

Authors
  1. Hui-Zhen Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kun-Yang Chuang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ming-Huang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuh-Shan Ho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuh-Shan Ho.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fu, HZ., Chuang, KY., Wang, MH. et al. Characteristics of research in China assessed with Essential Science Indicators. Scientometrics 88, 841–862 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0416-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0416-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation