ArticleHeliyon2022
Analysis of Ecuador's SCOPUS scientific production during the 2001-2020 period by means of standardized citation indicators.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The state of cancer research and its association with the cancer burden in Ecuador: a bibliometric study.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- One hundred years of Ecuadorian biomedical scientific output and its association with the main causes of mortality: a bibliometric study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
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
An analysis of the scientific production of Ecuador is performed by means of the composite indicator computed for Ecuador-based authors as compared to their counterparts of other South American countries. The dataset employed was obtained from the Databricks platform of the ELSEVIER's International Center for Science Research, ICSR. Therefore, this analysis is limited to the metadata of the documents published in journals indexed in SCOPUS. Comparison of the results obtained for two decades: 2001-2010 and 2011-2020 showed that the number of Ecuador-based researchers has significantly increased in different areas of knowledge. Moreover, comparison between the total number of authors that worked in Ecuador at any given year of the 2011-2020 period and the number of authors that are still working in this country up to the date of the data extraction (i.e., June 2021) showed an average of ∼68% of permanency. Analysis of the percentage distribution in terms of range quarters of the composite indicator (i.e., Q4: 0-1.5, Q3: 1.5-3.0, Q2: 3.0-4.5, and Q1: 4.5-6.0) showed that nearly the totality of the Ecuador-based researchers has composite indicators that lay in the Q4 and Q3 ranges for all the scientific fields considered. The latter was observed to be an effect of the scientific impact of South American countries, with larger investments in science and technology in comparison to Ecuador (i.e., Argentina, Brazil, and Chile). Exclusion of this group of countries in the calculation of the composite indicator of Ecuador-based authors resulted in a noticeable increment of scientists with composite indicators within Q2. Finally, our results suggest, in agreement with previous studies, a correlation between the sustained growth of scientific productivity in the decade 2011-2020 with the scientific programs and policies created by the state, where the initiative of scientific culture is shown as a strategy for growth and development.
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.