ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Global subnational estimates of migration of scientists reveal large disparities in internal and international flows.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. 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 role of professional networks and institutional prestige in shaping the first career moves of scholars.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Global subnational estimates of migration of scientists reveal large disparities in internal and international flows.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Researchers are key contributors to innovation. Their migration results in talent circulation and recombination of ideas. Due to data shortage, little is known about subnational mobility of scientists and the interrelationships between their internal and international migration patterns. We used data on 30+ million Scopus publications of 19+ million authors to infer migration from changes in affiliations. Our publicly shared database of global subnational estimates of migration reveals relevant disparities in the attractiveness of subnational regions. While, at the country level, some countries have acted as a global hub that attracts scholars from throughout the world, at the subnational level, some of their regions have negative net migration rates, with implications for scientific output and regional development, as well as the perpetuation of migration corridors. On average, subnational inequalities in attracting and sending scholars have increased for international but decreased for internal migration. In most countries, there is no single trend such that all subnational regions have been sending or receiving more scholars. Instead, a mix of patterns has been simultaneously at work, on the backdrop of globalization of migration, which is an asymmetric process where specific regions and subpopulations have higher access to international migration. For most subnational regions, when they are attractive for international migrants, they are also attractive for internal migrants, which is not always the case for emigration. Our results have implications for the global circulation of academic talent by adding the dimension of internal migration to "brain drain" and "brain circulation" in international migration.
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.