ArticleScience advances2015
Multinational teams and diseconomies of scale in collaborative research.
Article in Science advances, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Revealing the impact of teaching methods on anxiety among college students through a bibliometric study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Research trend of epigenetics and depression: adolescents' research needs to strengthen.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Pooled it
- Authorship Policies at U.S. Doctoral Universities: A Review and Recommendations for Future Policies.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Pooled it
- Mapping the Landscape of Epigenetic Research in Diabetes Mellitus: A Decade-Long Bibliometric Analysis (2014-2024).Current diabetes reviews · 2026Review
- Geopolitical impacts on the description of new terrestrial mollusc species.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Machine learning misclassification networks reveal a citation advantage of interdisciplinary publications only in high-impact journals.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The impact of US-China tensions on US science: Evidence from the NIH investigations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Scientific civility and academic performance.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence significantly facilitates development in the mental health of college students: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science.Nature human behaviour · 2023Review
- Research trends of exercise therapy of college students in depression from 2002 to 2022: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Impactful scientists have higher tendency to involve collaborators in new topics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Ten simple rules for Global North researchers to stop perpetuating helicopter research in the Global South.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Exploring the changing geographical pattern of international scientific collaborations through the prism of cities.PloS one · 2020Article
- Prevalence of Female Authors in Case Reports Published in the Medical Literature.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Automatic identification of recent high impact clinical articles in PubMed to support clinical decision making using time-agnostic features.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2019Article
- Follow the leader: On the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations.PloS one · 2019Article
- Quantifying the negative impact of brain drain on the integration of European science.Science advances · 2017Article
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
Collaborative research has become the mainstay in knowledge production across many domains of science and is widely promoted as a means of cultivating research quality, enhanced resource utilization, and high impact. An accurate appraisal of the value of collaborative research efforts is necessary to inform current funding and research policies. We reveal contemporary trends in collaborative research spanning multiple subject fields, with a particular focus on interactions between nations. We also examined citation outcomes of research teams and confirmed the accumulative benefits of having additional authors and unique countries involved. However, when per capita citation rates were analyzed to disambiguate the effects of authors and countries, decreasing returns in citations were noted with increasing authors among large research teams. In contrast, an increasing number of unique countries had a persistent additive citation effect. We also assessed the placement of foreign authors relative to the first author in paper bylines of biomedical research articles, which demonstrated a significant citation advantage of having an international presence in the second-to-last author position, possibly occupied by foreign primary co-investigators. Our analyses highlight the evolution and functional impact of team dynamics in research and suggest empirical strategies to evaluate team science.
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.