ArticlePloS one2014
The Scientific Competitiveness of Nations.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Bibliometric and Critical Review of Cellulose-Based Aerogels for Wastewater Treatment.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Mapping the landscape of rural cancer research: a global bibliometric analysis.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Review
- Network assortativity for a multidimensional evaluation of socio-economic territorial biases in university rankings.PloS one · 2025Article
- Mapping job fitness and skill coherence into wages: an economic complexity analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The scientific standing of nations and its relationship with economic competitiveness.PloS one · 2024Article
- Capability accumulation patterns across economic, innovation, and knowledge-production activities.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Quantifying the complexity and similarity of chess openings using online chess community data.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Quantifying progress in research topics across nations.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- USA vs Russia in the scientific arena.PloS one · 2023Article
- Understanding European integration with bipartite networks of comparative advantage.PNAS nexus · 2022Article
- The influence of Chinese scholars on global research.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The latent structure of global scientific development.Nature human behaviour · 2022Article
- Article
- Measuring nestedness: A comparative study of the performance of different metrics.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- The Scientific Impact Derived From the Disciplinary Profiles.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2020Article
- The Language of Innovation.PloS one · 2020Article
- Patent citation network analysis: A perspective from descriptive statistics and ERGMs.PloS one · 2020Article
- Unfolding the innovation system for the development of countries: coevolution of Science, Technology and Production.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Influence of Technological Innovations on Industrial Production: A Motif Analysis on the Multilayer Network.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We use citation data of scientific articles produced by individual nations in different scientific domains to determine the structure and efficiency of national research systems. We characterize the scientific fitness of each nation-that is, the competitiveness of its research system-and the complexity of each scientific domain by means of a non-linear iterative algorithm able to assess quantitatively the advantage of scientific diversification. We find that technological leading nations, beyond having the largest production of scientific papers and the largest number of citations, do not specialize in a few scientific domains. Rather, they diversify as much as possible their research system. On the other side, less developed nations are competitive only in scientific domains where also many other nations are present. Diversification thus represents the key element that correlates with scientific and technological competitiveness. A remarkable implication of this structure of the scientific competition is that the scientific domains playing the role of "markers" of national scientific competitiveness are those not necessarily of high technological requirements, but rather addressing the most "sophisticated" needs of the society.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.