1.Glänzel, W., Leta, J and Thijs, B. Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study. Scientometrics, 2006, 67-86. doi: 10.1007/s11192-006-0055-7
2.Alejandro M. Aragón, 2013. A measure for the impact of research, Scientific Reports, 1643, 2013. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01649
3.Baskaran, C. Research productivity of Alagappa University during 1999-2011: A Bibliometric study. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology., 2013, 33 (3), 236-242.
4.John N. Parker, Characterizing scientific elite: the social characteristics of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology. Scientometrics. 2010, 85(1), 129–143. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0234-4
5.Saravanan, S and Baskaran, C. Mapping of Bioremediation Research Output in India: A Scientometric Study. Library Philosophy & Practice (e-Journal)., 2018.
6. Liu, N. & Guan, J. Dynamic evolution of collaborative networks: evidence from Nano-energy research in China, Scientometrics (2015) 102: 1895. doi: 10.1007/s11192-014-1508-z
7.Baskaran, C. Publication meant for highly quality research through LIS in India: The Special Reference to DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology (DJLIT). Library Philosophy and Practice., 2018.
9.Liang Wang, et.al. Exploring the Emerging Evolution Trends of Urban Resilience Research by Scientometric Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health., 2018, 15(10), 2181; doi:10.3390/ijerph15102181
10.Baskaran, C and Rameshbabu, P. The substantial research on Quantitative analysis and Publications measure in Forensic Medicine, Library Philosophy and Practice(e-Journal)., 2019.
11.Mahapatra, M. On the validity of the theory of exponential growth of scientific Literature. Proceedings of the 15th IASLIC Conference, Bangalore, 1985, 61-70.
12.Garg, K. C., and Dwivedi, S. Pattern of collaboration in the discipline of Japanese encephalitis. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 2014, 34(3), 241–247. doi;10.14429/djlit.34.7342
The paper discusses the Research Pattern and Publications trend on Information Management (IM) during 2000-2019. The data will be taken to analyze by Web of Science (WoS) database from Clarivate analytics for purpose of study during period. It has analysed the highest 441 (9.04%) of the publications appeared in the year 2018, it followed by , 423( 8.67%) and 401(8.22%) of the publications have brought out in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Highest RGR observed that 1.277 and lowest 0.022 in 2019 and 2011 respectively. The majority 75.6 % of the publications appeared as Journal articles, it followed by 6.95% of the publications occupy Meeting abstract, others 6.27 % , 6.13%, 6.09%, 3.45% of the publications witnessed by Proceeding papers, Book Review, Editorial Material and review respectively. There are twenty authors have been ranked in the study, 30 (0.61%) of the publications do not find name of authors, it seems that anonymous authors hold the majority of the publications in the series. 1464 (30.18%) of the publications records contributed from USA, which one among the top country in terms distribution of more contribution in the field of information Management. The study found that there are twenty five institutions are listed, among them University of Washington has contributed highest 48 (0.98%) of the publications witnessed be a first position out of twenty five.