ArticleHeliyon2024
Assessing the relation between academic talent mobility and academic output.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a great controversy between academic talent mobility and academic output. This paper obtains the list of mobile academic talents (experimental group) from NSF. It matches them into the control group list according to the indicators of an academic institution, department, research direction, entry time, age, and NSF fund obtained in the near year. It carries out a seven-year follow-up survey on the quantity and quality of papers published by the experimental and control groups, using the "quasi-experimental research" method for the first time. The results show that, on the one hand, the academic output of Chinese academic talents is highly stable. Mobility is not the critical variable affecting academic output, indicating that academic output is more related to talents' research habits and research ability, which shows the highly stable academic quality of scholars; on the other hand, the study finds that scholars returning from overseas manifest the stability of academic output whose number and quality of academic papers remain highly stable even if the mobility happens again. This study reveals the objective relationship between academic talent mobility and academic output. It has significant reference value for China in the next stage of attracting talent from the international academic labor market.
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.