Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31755947›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Coauthor Country Affiliations in International Collaborative Research Funded by the US National Institutes of Health, 2009 to 2017.

Joshua C Grubbs, Roger I Glass, Peter H Kilmarx

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mapping the Evolution of Diagnostic Research onPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Global Health Perspectives on Race in Research: Neocolonial Extraction and Local Marginalization.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Joshua C GrubbsFogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Roger I GlassFogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Peter H KilmarxFogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest funder of biomedical and behavioral research in the world. International collaborative research-a subset of NIH's portfolio-is critical to furthering the agency's health research mission. Objective: To quantify the extent of the NIH's international collaborations and the relative importance of this research through the lens of publications. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used bibliometric data from the Web of Science database to analyze trends in the growth of NIH-funded publications from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2017, and examined their importance using national affiliations of all coauthors listed, h indices, and citation impact scores. All countries with coauthor affiliations in NIH-funded publications during the study period were included. Data were analyzed from October 22 through November 16, 2018. Exposures: Country affiliations of coauthors' institutions in NIH-funded publications indexed in the Web of Science database from 2009 to 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Trends in the number of NIH-supported publications with non-US coauthors during a 9-year period and their relative importance assessed by h index per country and category-normalized citation impact (CNCI) for groups of country affiliations in 2017. Results: From 2009 to 2017, the annual count of NIH-funded publications increased 46.2% from 67 041 to 98 002. This increase was driven in part by an increase in publications with a non-US author alone or as a collaborator with a US author compared with those exclusively with US authors, reflected by an increase in the percentage of publications with non-US coauthors from 28.3% to 34.8%. Moreover, in 2017, publications coauthored by US-affiliated and non-US-affiliated investigators had a higher mean CNCI (1.99) than those whose authors were only US affiliated (1.54) or non-US affiliated (1.35). China became the most frequent publishing partner, with 6982 coauthored publications and the greatest increase over time among non-US countries. Conclusions and Relevance: In a 9-year period when the NIH budget remained relatively unchanged, an increase in the number of publications occurred with a growing trend toward more international collaborations of authorship; these publications also had a higher CNCI than publications with only US or only non-US authors. The findings suggest that international collaboration is a vital and growing component of the NIH's research output and likely reflects increased globalization of biomedical research.

Indexed as

International CooperationAuthorshipBibliometricsBiomedical ResearchCross-Sectional StudiesHumansNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)Research Support as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31755947
PMCPMC6902828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.