Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln


Date of this Version


Document Type



Maharana RK, Das P. Research publication trend of Utkal University’s researchers indexed in Scopus during 2008 to 2012: a bibliometric analysis. Libr Philos Pract. 2013;(Paper 999). 12286c3f1c24c5bd 296342d264a48692/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=54903. Accessed April 25, 2018.

2. Agarwal P. Higher education in India: Growth, concerns and change agenda. High Educ Q. 2007;61(2):197-207. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2273.2007.00346.x

3. Patra S, Chand P. Library and information science research in India: A bibliometric study. Ann Libr Inf Stud. 2006;53(December):219-223. 123456789/6029. Accessed April 25, 2018.

4. Agarwal P. Higher Education in India: The Need for Change.; 2006. /bitstream/ 10419/ 176564/1/ WP180-Higher-Education-in-India.pdf. Accessed April 25, 2018.

5. Agarwal P. Indian Higher Education : Envisioning the Future Size , Structure and Growth.; 2015. hl=en&lr=&id= 8NCGAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Publication+trend+in+indian+universities&ots=4z1T-NvCqx&sig=-pGDB74okHXc59EyZg1ig728xl0. Accessed April 25, 2018.

6. Sevukan R, Sharma J. Bibliometric Analysis of Research Output of Biotechnology Faculties in Some Indian Central Universities. DESIDOC J Libr Inf Technol. 2008;28(6):11-20. doi:10.14429/djlit.28.6.218

7. Kumar HA, Dora M, Desai A. A Bibliometrics profile of Gujarat University, Ahmedabad during 2004-2013. DESIDOC J Libr Inf Technol. 2015;35(1):9-16. doi:10.14429/djlit.35.1.7699

8. Nagpaul PS. Contribution of Indian universities to the mainstream scientific literature: A bibliometric assessment. Scientometrics. 1995;32(1):11-36. doi:10.1007/BF02020186

9. Chitnis, Suma, Ed.|Altbach, Philip G. E. Higher Education Reform in India: Experience and Perspectives. 1993:438. Accessed April 25, 2018.

10. Abbott M, Doucouliagos H. Research Output of Australian Universities. Educ Econ. 2004;12(3):251-265. doi:10.1080/0964529042000258608

11. Abramo, Giovanni.; D’ Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea.; Pugini F. The Measurement of Italian Universities ’ Research Productivity by. Springer. 2008;76(2):1-27. Accessed April 25, 2018.

12. Prathap G, Gupta BM. Ranking of Indian universities for their research output and quality using a new performance index. Curr Sci. 2009;97(6):751-752. doi:10.1007/S11192-009-0066-2.5.

13. Amsaveni N, Batcha SM. Bibliometric Dimension of Gender studies in Informatics from Developed Countries. Libr Progress(International). 2009;29(2):215-224.

14. Batcha SM. Research Contributions on Oral Cancer in India : A Scientometric Analysis. Res J Libr Inf Sci. 2018;2(1):1-8.

15. Batcha S. Scientometric Analysis of Global Dengue Research and Applicability of Lotka ’ s Law. Informatics Stud. 2018;5(1):17-23.

16. Batcha SM. Research Productivity of Scientists and Researchers on Robotic Technology: A Scientometric Analysis. Int J Adv Trends Technol Manag Appl Sci. 2017;3(10):1-14. Accessed April 25, 2018.


Scientometrics is an important field of information science as it represents a unique set of techniques and tools for the monitoring and analysis of information resources and for the management of knowledge in social and organizational contexts. This article analysed the various Scientometric components of the articles published by top six universities of Tamil Nadu from 2000-2017. The study identifies research trend, characteristics growth and collaboration pattern of published literature. The analysis of data reveals that the average growth rate increases at the rate of 9.76%. Further, the average citation per paper observed is 12.18%. High degree of international collaboration is notified and USA and South Korea are found to be the most preferred collaborative countries. The CAGR calculated for six universities are 9.76. The major research publications outputs are from the field of Chemistry, Crystallography and Pharmacy.