The occurrence of ‘Sleeping Beauty’ publications in medical research: Their scientific impact and technological relevance


Autoři: Anthony F. J. van Raan aff001;  Jos J. Winnink aff001
Působiště autorů: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223373

Souhrn

We investigate publications in medical research that have gone unnoticed for a number of years after being published and then suddenly become cited to a significant degree. Such publications are called Sleeping Beauties (SBs). This study focuses on SBs that are cited in patents. We find that the increasing trend of the relative number of SBs comes to an end around 1998. However, still a constant fraction of publications becomes an SB. Many SBs become highly cited publications, they even belong to the top-10 to 20% most cited publications in their field. We measured the scaling of the number of SBs in relation to the sleeping period length, during-sleep citation-intensity, and with awakening citation-intensity. We determined the Grand Sleeping Beauty Equation for these medical SBs which shows that the probability of awakening after a period of deep sleep is becoming rapidly smaller for longer sleeping periods and that the probability for higher awakening intensities decreases extremely rapidly. The exponents of the scaling functions show a time-dependent behavior which suggests a decreasing occurrence of SBs with longer sleeping periods. We demonstrate that the fraction of SBs cited by patents before scientific awakening exponentially increases. This finding shows that the technological time lag is becoming shorter than the sleeping time. Inventor-author self-citations may result in shorter technological time lags, but this effect is small. Finally, we discuss characteristics of an SBs that became one of the highest cited medical papers ever.

Klíčová slova:

Bibliometrics – Citation analysis – Engineering and technology – Growth factors – Insulin resistance – Medicine and health sciences – Patents – Databases


Zdroje

1. Garfield E (1970). Would Mendel’s work have been ignored if the Science Citation Index was available 100 years ago? Essays of an Information Scientist 1, 69–70; also in Current Contents 2, 69–70.

2. Garfield E (1980). Premature discovery or delayed recognition–why? Essays of an Information Scientist 4, 488–493; also in Current Contents 21, 5–10, 1980.

3. Garfield E (1989). Delayed recognition in scientific discovery: Citation frequency analysis aids the search for case histories. Current Contents 23, 3–9.

4. Garfield E (1990). More delayed recognition. Part 2. From Inhibin to Scanning electron microscopy. Essays of an Information Scientist 13, 68–74; also in Current Contents 9, 3–9, 1990.

5. Stent GS (1972). Prematurity and uniqueness in scientific discovery. Scientific American 227(6) 84–93. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican1272-84 4564019

6. van Raan AFJ (2015). Dormitory of Physical and Engineering Sciences: Sleeping Beauties May Be Sleeping Innovations. PLoS ONE 10(10): e0139786.

7. van Raan AFJ (2017). Sleeping Beauties Cited in Patents: Is there also a Dormitory of Inventions? Scientometrics 110(3) 1123–1156. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-2215-8 28255185

8. van Raan AFJ, Winnink JJ (2018). Do younger Sleeping Beauties prefer a technological prince? Scientometrics 114: 701–717. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2603-8 29449753

9. van Raan AFJ (2017). Patent Citations Analysis and Its Value in Research Evaluation: A Review and a New Approach to Map Technology-relevant Research. Journal of Data and Information Science 2(1) 13–50.

10. van Raan AFJ (2004). Sleeping Beauties in Science. Scientometrics 59 (3), 461–466.

11. Narin F, Hamilton KS, Olivastro D (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy 26, 317–330.

12. Callaert J, Pellens M, van Looy B (2014). Sources of Inspiration? Making Sense of Scientific References in Patents. Scientometrics 98(3): 1617–1629.

13. Du J, Li P, Haunschild R, Sun Y, Tang X (2019). Patent citations to scientific papers as early signs for predicting delayed recognition of scientific discoveries: a comparative study with instant recognition. arXiv e-prints (arXiv:1906.07953):1–12

14. Winnink JJ, Tijssen RJW (2014). R&D dynamics and scientific breakthroughs in HIV/AIDS drugs development: the case of integrase inhibitors. Scientometrics 101(1): 1–16.

15. A patent family is a set of, in legal terms, equivalent patents that describe one and the same invention. This is for instance the case when the same invention is patented in more than one country. In this article we use the term ‘patent’ also for ‘patent families’.

16. As discussed earlier, with patents we mean patent families and particularly the member of a patent family with the earliest filing year. The patent families are defined in the DocDB database which is the internal patent database of the European Patent Database (EPO) that forms the basis for the PATSTAT database.

17. Patents may have multiple IPC codes and thus they may belong to more than one technological field. The classification with 35 technology fields is explained in [18].

18. Schmoch U (2008). Concept of a Technology Classification for Country Comparisons, see http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/classifications/en/ipc ce 41/ipc ce 41 5-annex1.pdf.

19. The earliest filing date is the well-documented date closest to the time of invention and can therefore be used as a proxy for that moment of time.

20. Noyons ECM, van Raan AFJ, Grupp H, Schmoch U (1994). Exploring the science and technology interface: inventor-author relations in laser medicine research. Research Policy 23(4):443–457.

21. Albert MB, Avery D, Narin F, McAllister P (1991). Direct Validation of Citation Counts as Indicators of Industrially Important Patents. Research Policy 20(3):251–259.

22. Trajtenberg M (1990). A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations. RAND Journal of Economics 21(1):172–187.

23. Harhoff D, Narin F, Scherer M, Vopel K (1999). Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions. Review of Economics and Statistics 81(3):511–515.

24. Matthews DR, Hosker JP, Rudenski AS, Naylor BA, Treacher DF, Turner RC (1985). Homeostasis Model Assessment—Insulin Resistance and Beta-Cell Function from Fasting Plasma-Glucose and Insulin Concentrations in Man. Diabetologia 28(7): 412–419. doi: 10.1007/bf00280883 3899825

25. van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84(2), 523–538. For more information see http://www.vosviewer.com/Home. doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 20585380


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 10