Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42528971›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2026

Brain drain or brain circulation? a perspective from Latin American scientists.

Alina Freire-Fierro, Daniela Pareja-Mejía, Luisa Maria Diele-Viegas, Patricia Castillo-Briceño, Anabel Martinez-Bengochea, Patricia Henriquez-Coronel, J Francisco Morales, Ana Lucía Bravo-Cazar, Carla Novoa Sepúlveda, Karina Fidanza Rodrigues and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Alina Freire-FierroTranslational Plant Research Group, Faculty of Life Sciences, Universidad Regional Amazónica Ikiam, Tena, Napo, Ecuador.
Daniela Pareja-MejíaO'Connell Laboratory, Department of Biology, School of Humanities and Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Luisa Maria Diele-ViegasLaboratório de (Bio) Diversidade no Antropoceno, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Patricia Castillo-BriceñoEquatorial Biome & Ocean Acidification (EBIOAC) Lab, Faculty of Life Sciences & Technologies, Universidad Laica Eloy Alfaro de Manabí (ULEAM), Manta, Manabí, Ecuador.
Anabel Martinez-BengocheaPacesa Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Patricia Henriquez-CoronelResearch Group in Educommunication and Scientific Dissemination for Sustainability (ECODIS), Universidad Laica Eloy Alfaro de Manabí (ULEAM), Manta, Manabí, Ecuador.
J Francisco MoralesHerbarium, University of the West Indies, Campus St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago.
Ana Lucía Bravo-CazarTranslational Plant Research Group, Faculty of Life Sciences, Universidad Regional Amazónica Ikiam, Tena, Napo, Ecuador.
Carla Novoa SepúlvedaVALPL Herbarium, University of Playa Ancha, Valparaíso, Chile.
Karina Fidanza RodriguesLaboratorio de Sistemática y Biogeografía de Plantas, Departamento de Biología, Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM), Maringá, Brazil.
Stephanie Vargas AguilarDepartment of Molecular Biology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Federico Garcia-YanesEscuela de Ciencias Biológicas, Grupo de Investigación en Biología para la Conservación, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Tunja, Colombia.
Tatiana AriasGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Medio Ambiente y Salud (BIOMAS), Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Aplicadas, Universidad de Las Américas (UDLA), Quito, Ecuador.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though long-standing asymmetries between Global North (GN) and Global South (GS) research systems have shaped the production and circulation of scientific knowledge, a quiet transformation is emerging. Increasing scientific mobility is reframing "brain drain" as brain circulation, highlighting the potential for more reciprocal and equitable exchanges. Scientists from the GS working across borders-the scientific diaspora (SD)-are emerging as key actors in transforming global scientific collaborations. Here, we combine conceptual analysis with survey data from 107 primarily Latin American researchers to examine how structural inequalities and diaspora engagement intersect. Respondents consistently identified interconnected asymmetries, including unequal intellectual recognition, authorship imbalances, and GN dominance in funding and agenda-setting. Publishing systems were also perceived as reinforcing disparities through language barriers and high costs, with women reporting higher levels of structural inequality. Despite these challenges, diaspora scientists are recognized as uniquely positioned to mediate knowledge exchange, expand networks, and foster more equitable collaborations. However, SD transformative potential remains limited by precarious career conditions and weak institutional support. Without structural reform, brain circulation will remain an unrealized promise rather than a pathway toward a more just global scientific system.

Indexed as

brain circulationGlobal northGlobal Southleadershipscientific diaspora

Identifiers

PMID42528971
PMCPMC13415780

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.