ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2024
Bibliometric comparison of Nobel Prize laureates in physiology or medicine and chemistry.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Country-specific citation disparities in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology from 2001 to 2024.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- The Schmiedeberg Medal of the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology: a biographical and bibliometric analysis of the 47 recipients from 1956 to 2024.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Article
- Gender- and discipline-specific bibliometric analysis of elite biomedical scientists: how is pharmacology performing?Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Article
- The Gender Award Gap in German medical societies 2000-2023: the Fritz-Külz-Award as an example.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Article
- Bibliometric comparison of Nobel Prize laureates: a few suggestions.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Article
- Arbitrariness of bibliometric parameters: a case study on leading scientists in the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (DGPT).Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Nobel Prize is an annual honor awarded to the researchers who have made the greatest contribution to humanity with their work in the year in question. Nobel Prizes for physiology or medicine and chemistry most often have direct or indirect pharmacological relevance. In this study, we performed a bibliometric analysis of Nobel Prize laureates from 2006 to 2022. The parameters include the nationalities and age of the laureates, age at their productivity peaks, the research locations, the H-index, the age-adjusted H-index, and the number of citations and publications, and, for each parameter, a comparison of female and male award laureates. Men were much more often awarded the Nobel Prize than women. Surprisingly, women were younger than their male colleagues at the time of the award although the productivity peak was similar. There was a correlation between all publications and the H-index, which was slightly stronger for women than for men. The age-adjusted H-index showed no difference among genders. The USA were the country with the highest number of Nobel Prize laureates, both male and female. Overall, the bibliometric characteristics of male and female Nobel Prize laureates are similar, indicating that among the group of Nobel Prize laureates, there is no bias against women. Rather, the achievements of women are recognized earlier than those of men. The major difference is that the number of women becoming Nobel Prize laureates is much smaller than the number of men. This study provides a starting for future studies with larger populations of scientists to analyze disparities.
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.