scholarly journals Academic women and their children: Parenting during COVID ‐19 and the impact on scholarly productivity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Bender ◽  
Kristina S. Brown ◽  
Deanna L. Hensley Kasitz ◽  
Olga Vega
Keyword(s):  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Academic Women ◽  
The Impact

Cross-CTSA Evaluation of KL2 Scholars' Scholarly Productivity Using Bibliometrics and Federal Follow-on Funding (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelli Qua ◽  
Fei Yu ◽  
Tanha Patel ◽  
Gaurav Dave ◽  
Katherine Cornelius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Federal Funding ◽  
The Other ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Training Success ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Time Point

BACKGROUND Evaluating outcomes of a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hub’s clinical and translational research (CTR) training (e.g., KL2 program) requires selecting reliable, accessible, and standardized measures. Since measures of scholarly success usually focus on publication output and extramural funding, CTSA hubs have started to use bibliometrics to evaluate the impact of their supported scholarly activities. However, the evaluation of KL2 programs across CTSAs is limited, and the use of bibliometrics and follow-on funding is minimal. OBJECTIVE This study sought to evaluate scholarly productivity, impact, and collaboration using bibliometrics and federal follow-on funding of KL2 scholars from three CTSA hubs and define and assess CTR training success indicators. METHODS The sample included KL2 scholars from three CTSA institutions (A-C). Bibliometric data for each scholar in the sample were collected from both SciVal and iCite, including scholarly productivity, citation impact, and research collaboration. Three federal follow-on funding measures (at the five-year, eight-year, and overall time point) were collected internally and confirmed by examining NIH RePORTER. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analysis were computed using SPSS to assess bibliometrics results and federal follow-on funding of KL2 scholars. RESULTS A total of 143 KL2 scholars were included in the sample with relatively equal groups across three CTSA institutions (A-C). The included KL2 scholars produced more publications and citation counts at the eight-year than the five-year time point (3.4 vs. 3.75 publications per year on average; 26.16 and 26.44 citations per year respectively). Overall, the KL2 publications from all three institutions were cited twice as much as others in their fields based on NIH Relative Citation Ratio. KL2 scholars published work with researchers from other US institutions over two times (five-year point) or three and a half times (eight-year point) more than others in their research fields. Within five-year and eight-year post-matriculation, 44% (n = 63) and 52% (n = 74) of KL2 scholars achieved federal funding respectively. Institution C's KL2-scholars had a significantly higher citation rate per publication than the other institutions (p < .001). Institution A had a significantly lower rate of nationally field-weighted collaboration compared to the other institutions (p < .001). Institution B Scholars were more likely to have received federal funding than scholars at Institution A or C (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS Multi-institutional data showed a high level of scholarly productivity, impact, collaboration, and federal follow-on funding achieved by KL2 scholars. This study provided insights on using bibliometric and federal follow-on funding data to evaluate CTR training success across institutions. CTSA KL2 programs and other CTR career training programs can benefit from these findings in terms of understanding metrics of career success and using that knowledge to develop highly targeted strategies to support early-stage CTR investigators' career development.

scholarly journals TOOLS OR TOYS? THE IMPACT OF HIGH TECHNOLOGY ON SCHOLARLY PRODUCTIVITY

2002 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 539-555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel S. Hamermesh ◽  
Sharon M. Oster
Keyword(s):  
High Technology ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Explaining Gender Differentials In Scholarly Productivity: The Case Of Academic Economists

2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Washburn Taylor ◽  
Blakely Fox Fender ◽  
Kimberly Gladden Burke
Keyword(s):  
Multivariate Regression ◽  
Personal Characteristics ◽  
Multivariate Regression Analysis ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Gender Differentials ◽  
Economics Journals ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Collaborative Efforts

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of personal characteristics, institutional factors, and time-competing workplace requirements on scholarly productivity in peer-reviewed economics journals.  The study utilizes a unique data set of individual-specific information for 714 academic economists.  The multivariate regression analysis shows that both teaching and service commitments reduce scholarly work in peer reviewed journals.  The paper also presents an analysis of the data disaggregated by gender.  While the impact of teaching and service on productivity appears roughly similar, the results indicate that collaborative efforts, whether formal or informal, benefit women’s publication efforts more than their male counterparts

Teaching Load and Other Determinants of Research Output Among University Faculty

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 300-311
Author(s):  
Kanybek Nur-tegin ◽  
Sanjay Venugopalan ◽  
Jessica Young
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Original Data ◽  
University Faculty ◽  
Faculty Research ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Faculty Rank ◽  
Teaching Load ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Jel Classifications

Do faculty who teach more produce less research? We revisit this question with a better measure of research productivity, eschewing simple publication counts in favor of the impact of research measured by Google citations. Using original data, we pose this question in the broader context of other determinants of scholarly productivity. We find that heavier teaching crowds out research. Furthermore, faculty with more teaching duties tend to protect the quantity of their research more than the quality. We also find that faculty rank, promotion, experience, gender, the ability to win grants, and the ranking of the resident school are significant predictors of faculty research output. JEL Classifications: I23, J24

The Impact of National Institutes of Health Funding on Scholarly Productivity in Academic Plastic Surgery

2016 ◽  
Vol 137 (2) ◽  
pp. 690-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Silvestre ◽  
Joseph M. Abbatematteo ◽  
Benjamin Chang ◽  
Joseph M. Serletti ◽  
Jesse A. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Plastic Surgery ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Health Funding ◽  
The Impact

Formation of Lunar Craters and Bright Rays as a Result of Meteorite Impacts

1962 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 415-418
Author(s):  
K. P. Stanyukovich ◽  
V. A. Bronshten
Keyword(s):  
Explosive Charge ◽  
The Moon ◽  
Meteorite Impacts ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Lunar Craters ◽  
The Impact

The phenomena accompanying the impact of large meteorites on the surface of the Moon or of the Earth can be examined on the basis of the theory of explosive phenomena if we assume that, instead of an exploding meteorite moving inside the rock, we have an explosive charge (equivalent in energy), situated at a certain distance under the surface.

The Geosciences Applied to Lunar Exploration

1962 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 169-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Green
Keyword(s):  
Lunar Surface ◽  
Probable Mechanism ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Lunar Exploration ◽  
Geological Model ◽  
Apply Geophysics ◽  
Surface Features ◽  
The Impact

The term geo-sciences has been used here to include the disciplines geology, geophysics and geochemistry. However, in order to apply geophysics and geochemistry effectively one must begin with a geological model. Therefore, the science of geology should be used as the basis for lunar exploration. From an astronomical point of view, a lunar terrain heavily impacted with meteors appears the more reasonable; although from a geological standpoint, volcanism seems the more probable mechanism. A surface liberally marked with volcanic features has been advocated by such geologists as Bülow, Dana, Suess, von Wolff, Shaler, Spurr, and Kuno. In this paper, both the impact and volcanic hypotheses are considered in the application of the geo-sciences to manned lunar exploration. However, more emphasis is placed on the volcanic, or more correctly the defluidization, hypothesis to account for lunar surface features.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document