ArticleScientific reports2020
An equity-oriented rethink of global rankings with complex networks mapping development.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Network assortativity for a multidimensional evaluation of socio-economic territorial biases in university rankings.PloS one · 2025Article
- Detecting the socio-economic drivers of confidence in government with eXplainable Artificial Intelligence.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Territorial bias in university rankings: a complex network approach.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Sustainable development goals: conceptualization, communication and achievement synergies in a complex network framework.Applied network science · 2022Article
- Worldwide impact of lifestyle predictors of dementia prevalence: An eXplainable Artificial Intelligence analysis.Frontiers in big data · 2022Article
- A network approach to rank countries chasing sustainable development.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Comprehensive Survey of Using Machine Learning in the COVID-19 Pandemic.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, world rankings are promoted and used by international agencies, governments and corporations to evaluate country performances in a specific domain, often providing a guideline for decision makers. Although rankings allow a direct and quantitative comparison of countries, sometimes they provide a rather oversimplified representation, in which relevant aspects related to socio-economic development are either not properly considered or still analyzed in silos. In an increasingly data-driven society, a new generation of cutting-edge technologies is breaking data silos, enabling new use of public indicators to generate value for multiple stakeholders. We propose a complex network framework based on publicly available indicators to extract important insight underlying global rankings, thus adding value and significance to knowledge provided by these rankings. This approach enables the unsupervised identification of communities of countries, establishing a more targeted, fair and meaningful criterion to detect similarities. Hence, the performance of states in global rankings can be assessed based on their development level. We believe that these evaluations can be crucial in the interpretation of global rankings, making comparison between countries more significant and useful for citizens and governments and creating ecosystems for new opportunities for development.
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.