ArticleNature communications2021
Scientific prizes and the extraordinary growth of scientific topics.
Article in Nature communications, 2021. 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.
- The distinctive innovation patterns and network embeddedness of scientific prizewinners.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Gender disparities in social and personality psychology awards from 1968 to 2021.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- Promotional language and the adoption of innovative ideas in science.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science.Nature human behaviour · 2023Review
- SciSciNet: A large-scale open data lake for the science of science research.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Do open data impact citizens' behavior? Assessing face mask panic buying behaviors during the Covid-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- 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
- Scientific X-ray: Scanning and quantifying the idea evolution of scientific publications.PloS one · 2022Article
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
Fast growing scientific topics have famously been key harbingers of the new frontiers of science, yet, large-scale analyses of their genesis and impact are rare. We investigated one possible factor connected with a topic's extraordinary growth: scientific prizes. Our longitudinal analysis of nearly all recognized prizes worldwide and over 11,000 scientific topics from 19 disciplines indicates that topics associated with a scientific prize experience extraordinary growth in productivity, impact, and new entrants. Relative to matched non-prizewinning topics, prizewinning topics produce 40% more papers and 33% more citations, retain 55% more scientists, and gain 37 and 47% more new entrants and star scientists, respectively, in the first five-to-ten years after the prize. Funding do not account for a prizewinning topic's growth. Rather, growth is positively related to the degree to which the prize is discipline-specific, conferred for recent research, or has prize money. These findings reveal new dynamics behind scientific innovation and investment.
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.