Date of this Version
1- CHATURVEDI (S) (2002). Status and Development of Biotechnology in India: An Analytical Overview. RIS Discussion Papers. Available at https://www.ris.org.in/images/RIS_images/pdf/dp28_pap.pdf
2- PARAMESWARAN (R) (2015). Research output of Anna University: A Scientometric Study. Knowledge librarian- An International Peer Reviewed Bilingual E-Journal of Library and Information Science, Vol. 2 (2).
3- BALASUBRAMANI (R) (2014). Mapping the research productivity of Banaras Hindu University: A Scientometric Study. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology. Vol. 59 (2).
4- HASAN (NABI) and SINGH (MUKHTAR) (2015). Research Output of Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs): A Scientometric Study. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries (QQML) 4: 293—305.
5- MAHBUBA (DILRUBA) and ROUSSEAU (RONALD) (2010). A Scientometric Analysis Of Health And Population Research In South Asia: Focus On Two Research Organisations. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, Vol.15 (3), 135-147.
6- MAHADEVA (S), SHASHIKIRAN (M) and KARIGOWDA (D) (2017). Scientometric Analysis of Research Publications of Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur: A study based on Indian Citation Index (2004 -2016). International Journal for Innovative Research in Multidisciplinary Field. Vol. 3(2) (Available online on – www.ijirmf.com Page 160)
7- SINGH (VIVEK KUMAR) (2015). A Scientometric Study of Research Output of Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati. Indian J. Sci. Res. 11 (2): 81-84
8- M. (PRAKASH) (2017). Indian Contribution to Biotechnology Research: Scientometric Analysis. Journal of Advances in Library and Information Science. Vol. 6 (1), 36-40
9- PATRA (SWAPAN KUMAR) and CHAND (PRAKASH) (2005). Biotechnology Research Profile of India. National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources. Vol. 63(3), 583-597
10- AJIFERUKE (I), BURREL (Q) and TAGUE (J) (1988). Collaborative Coefficient: A Single Measure of the Degree of Collaboration in Research. Scientometrics, Vol. 14(5-6), 421-433.
11- DE SOLLA PRICE (D. J.) & BEAVER (D.B.) (1966). Collaboration in an Invisible College. American Psychologist, Vol. 21(11), 1011-18.
12- GARG (K.C.) and PADHI (P) (2001). A study of Collaboration in Laser Science and Technology. Scientometrics, 2001, 51(2), 415-27
13- DE SOLLA PRICE (D. J.) (1981). The analysis of Scientometrics for Policy Implications. Scientometrics, Vol. 3, 47-54.
14- FRAME (J.D.) (1977). Mainstream Research in Latin America and Caribbean, Interciencia, Vol. 2, 143-48.
15- SCHUBERT (A) and BRAUN (T) (1986). Relative Indicators and Relational Charts for Comparative Assessment of Publication Output and Citation Impact. Scientometrics, Vol. 9, 281- 291.
16- BORDONS (M) GOMEZ (I) and TERESA FERNANDEZ (M) (1996). Local, Domestic and International Scientific Collaboration in Biomedical Research. Scientometrics, Vol. 37(2), 279-95.
17- KARKI (M.M.S) and GARG (K. C) (1997). Bibliometrics of Alkaloid Chemistry Research in India. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Science, Vol. 37, 157-161.
18- YAO (QIANG) et.al. (2014). Scientometric Trends And Knowledge Maps Of Global Health Systems Research. BioMed Central. (Available at https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-12-26.)s
19- SAVANUR (KIRAN) AND SRIKANTH (R). Modified Collaborative Coefficient: A New Measure for Quantifying Degree of Research Collaboration. (Available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8816/5604ffbb2403ab1b00a57d5c1f89b3f05f27.pdf.)
Scientometric study is an effective assessment tool for ongoing researches in a given field. It applies mathematical and statistical methods to study the use of documents and patterns of publication. Present work attempts to describe the patterns of publication by top ten Indian Academic/Research Organizations in the field of Biotechnology. Overall, 5423 articles were related to the field in Scopus database during 2001-2016. The applied scientometric tools are Collaboration Coefficient, Co-authorship Index and Activity Index to study the trend of authorship and collaborative research activities in the given domain. The activity Index formula has been modified for the mapping of Institute data. The most preferred country for international collaboration was United States.