ArticlePloS one2019
Follow the leader: On the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The top 100 most cited articles on mucopolysaccharidoses: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Pooled it
- Scientometric analysis of neglected tropical disease research in Southeast Asia: insights for integrated disease control strategies.Tropical diseases, travel medicine and vaccines · 2026Article
- How do women and men differ in research collaborations based on authorship positions? The Spanish case.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2025Article
- 'All things are in flux': China in global science.Higher education · 2022Article
- Space and scale in higher education: the glonacal agency heuristic revisited.Higher education · 2022Article
- Thinking Together, Working Apart: Leveraging a Community of Practice to Facilitate Productive and Meaningful Remote Collaboration.International journal of health policy and management · 2021Article
- Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research: A Bibliometric Analysis over a 50-Year Period.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Socialization During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Social and Scientific Networks During Social Distancing.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021Article
- Task specialization across research careers.eLife · 2020Article
- The impact of air transport availability on research collaboration: A case study of four universities.PloS one · 2020Article
- Comment regarding the article "Comparative metrics of neurosurgical scientific journals: What do they mean to readers?"Surgical neurology international · 2020Article
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
National contributions to science are influenced by a number of factors, including economic capacity, national scientific priorities, science policy, and institutional settings and cultures. Nations do not have equal opportunities to access the global scientific market, and therefore, often seek out international partners with complementary resources and expertise. This study aims at investigating national collaboration strategies, with a focus on research leadership-measured through corresponding authorship-and its relationship with scientific impact. Results show that countries with higher R&D investments are more scientifically independent, and confirm that international collaboration is positively related to citation impact. However, leadership in international collaboration is inversely related with a countries' share of international collaboration and there is a very little relationship between citation impact and international leadership. For instance, most countries-and particularly those that have fewer resources-have higher scientific impact when they are not leading. This suggests that, despite increasing global participation in science, most international collaborations are asymmetrical, and that the research system remains structured around a few dominate nations.
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.