Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38228669›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Dynamics of technology emergence in innovation networks.

Martin Ho, Henry C W Price, Tim S Evans, Eoin O'Sullivan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Martin Ho *Centre for Science Technology and Innovation Policy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 0HU, UK. wtmh3@eng.cam.ac.uk.
Henry C W Price *Centre for Complexity Science, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK.
Tim S EvansCentre for Complexity Science, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK.
Eoin O'SullivanCentre for Science Technology and Innovation Policy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 0HU, UK.
Imperial College London · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Gatsby Charitable Foundation NMZM/325
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To create the next innovative product, participants in science need to understand which existing technologies can be combined, what new science must be discovered, and what new technologies must be invented. Knowledge of these often arrives by means of expert consensus or popularity metrics, masking key information on how intellectual efforts accumulate into technological progress. To address this shortcoming, we first present a method to establish a mathematical link between technological evolution and complex networks: a path of events that narrates innovation bottlenecks. Next, we quantify the position and proximity of documents to these innovation paths. The result is an innovation network that more exhaustively captures deterministic knowledge flows with respect to a marketed innovative product. Our dataset, containing over three million biomedical citations, demonstrates the possibility of quantifying the accumulation, speed, and division of labour in innovation over a sixty-year time horizon. The significance of this study includes the (i) use of a purpose-generated dataset showing causal paths from research to development to product; (ii) analysis of the innovation process as a directed acyclic graph; (iii) comparison between calendar time and network time; (iv) ordering of science funders along technology lifecycles; (v) quantification of innovative activities' importance to an innovative outcome; and (vi) integration of publication, patent, clinical trial, regulatory data to study innovation holistically.

Indexed as

TechnologyInventions

Identifiers

PMID38228669
PMCPMC10791630
OpenAlexW4390904361

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.