Papers of interest to SIG Merics readers

[Eugene Garfield]

-- 

 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE:          Evolution of the literature on clinical neurology in
                Spain, France, Italy and Germany over the period 2000-2009 (Article,
                Spanish)
AUTHOR:         Inigo, J; Iriarte, J
SOURCE:         REVISTA DE NEUROLOGIA 53 (10). NOV 16 2011. p.591-599
                REVISTA DE NEUROLOGIA, BARCELONA

SEARCH TERM(S):  GARFIELD E  rauth;
                 HIRSCH JE          P NATL ACAD SCI USA   102:16569 2005;
                 REV NEUROLOGIA  source_abbrev_20;
                 GARFIELD E         JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC   295:90    2006

KEYWORDS:       Bibliometric analysis; Comparison between countries;
                Publications in neurology
KEYWORDS+:       SCIENCE-CITATION-INDEX; HIRSCHS H-INDEX; BIBLIOMETRIC
                INDICATORS; BIOMEDICAL PUBLICATIONS; SCIENTIFIC
                PUBLICATION; IMPACT FACTOR; JOURNALS; PRODUCTIVITY;
                QUALITY; WEB

ABSTRACT:       Aim. This study analyzes the productivity and visibility
of Spanish publications in the area of clinical neurology in the period
2000-2009 and compared with those for Italy, France and Germany.

Materials and methods. We used the database Web of Science. The analysis (annual and in five-year) was restricted to the citable documents (original articles, reviews and proceedings papers). Bibliometric indicators used were the number of publications, citations received by publications and Hirsch's h-index. We also assessed the slope of the annual growth rate (b), the number of publications by language and the international collaboration.

Results. In the period 2000-2009 there were 46,114 publications in neurology clinic of which 6,998 were Spanish publications (h = 75),
11,629 in Italy (h = 101), French 9,745 (h = 102) and 20,143 in Germany (h = 124). The rate of increase in the total number of publications in Spain (b = 15) was lower than that observed in Italy (b = 65), Germany (b = 61) or France (b = 34). In the case of publications in English, the growth rate was higher for Spain (b = 37) than for France (b = 36) but lower than for Germany (b = 54) and Italy (b = 65).

Conclusions. Although the total number of publications and the observed increase are lower in Spain compared to Italy, France or Germany, the Spanish publications in Clinical Neurology shows good trend indicators with regard to publications in English and international collaboration.
This improvement was associated with greater visibility as shown by the five-year analysis of citations received by Spanish publications.

AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Iriarte, Univ Navarra, Clin Univ Navarra, Pio XII 36,
                E-31080 Pamplona, Navarra, Spain

 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE:          Collaboration and Productivity in Scientific Synthesis
                (Article, English)
AUTHOR:         Hampton, SE; Parker, JN
SOURCE:         BIOSCIENCE 61 (11). NOV 2011. p.900-910 AMER INST
                BIOLOGICAL SCI, WASHINGTON

SEARCH TERM(S):  PRICE DJD  rauth

KEYWORDS:       synthetic science; sociology of collaboration;
                interdisciplinary science; scientific metrics; research
                productivity and impact
KEYWORDS+:       KNOWLEDGE; SPECIALIZATION; SCIENCES; BIOLOGY; TRUST

ABSTRACT:       Scientific synthesis has transformed ecological research
and presents opportunities for advancements across the sciences; to date, however, little is known about the antecedents of success in synthesis.
Building on findings from 10 years of detailed research on social interactions in synthesis groups at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, we demonstrated with large-scale quantitative analyses that face-to-face interaction has been vital to success in synthesis groups, boosting the production of peer-reviewed publications.
But it has been about more than just meeting; the importance of resident scientists at synthesis centers was also evident, in that including synthesis-center residents in geographically distributed working groups further increased productivity. Moreover, multi-institutional collaboration, normally detrimental to productivity, was positively associated with productivity in this stimulating environment. Finally, participation in synthesis groups significantly increased scientists'
collaborative propensity and visibility, positively affecting scientific careers and potentially increasing the capacity of the scientific community to leverage synthesis for enhanced scientific understanding.

AUTHOR ADDRESS: SE Hampton, Univ Calif Santa Barbara, Natl Ctr Ecol Anal &
                Synth, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA

 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE:          Patently Impossible (Article, English)
AUTHOR:         Seymore, SB
SOURCE:         VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW 64 (5). OCT 2011. p.1491-1544,1489
                VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW, NASHVILLE

SEARCH TERM(S):  LOCK S             BRIT MED J            290:1560  1985

KEYWORDS+:       INSUFFICIENT DISCLOSURE REJECTIONS; SCIENCE; LAW;
                RETHINKING; INNOVATION; ECONOMICS; INVENTION; OFFICE;
                SYSTEM; RIGHTS

ABSTRACT:       The quest to achieve the impossible fuels creativity,
spawns new fields of inquiry, illuminates old ones, and extends the frontiers of knowledge. It is difficult, however, to obtain a patent for an invention which seems impossible, incredible, or conflicts with well- established scientific principles. The principal patentability hurdle is operability, which an inventor cannot overcome if there is reason to doubt that the invention can really achieve the intended result. Despite its laudable gatekeeping role, this Article identifies two problems with the law of operability. First, though objective in theory, the operability analysis rests on subjective credibility assessments. These credibility assessments can introduce a bias toward unpatentability, with inventions emerging from new, poorly understood, and paradigm-shifting technologies as well as those from fields with a poor track record of success as the most vulnerable. Second, what happens when the impossible becomes possible? History reveals that the Patent Office and the courts will continue to deny patents for a long time thereafter.

This Article argues that the mishandling of seemingly impossible inventions vitiates the presumption of patentability, prevents the patent system from sitting at the cutting edge of technology, and frustrates the patent system's overarching goal to promote scientific and technological progress. In an effort to resolve these problems and fill a gap in patent scholarship, this Article offers a new framework for gauging the patentability of seemingly impossible inventions. Briefly, it contends that a more robust enforcement of patent law's enablement requirement can and should perform the gatekeeping role because it can resolve whether an invention works by weighing objective, technical factors. This approach would quickly reveal technical merit for inventions that really work or, alternatively, the fatal flaw for inventions that are truly impossible.
Its implementation would not only eliminate the need for the operability requirement, but it would also streamline patent examination, improve the disclosure function of the patent system, promote scientific and technological progress, and ultimately foster innovation.

AUTHOR ADDRESS: SB Seymore, Vanderbilt Univ, Nashville, TN 37235 USA