A Scientometric Study on Neuroanatomy Literature


  • J. Ramakrishnan S.G. Deputy Librarian, Regional Medical Library, The Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • G. Ravi Sankar S.G. Deputy Librarian, Regional Medical Library, The Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • K. Thavamani Assistant Librarian, Regional Medical Library, The Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu




Scientometrics, Neuroanatomy, Relative Growth Rate (RGR), Doubling time (Dt), Degree of Collaboration (DC), Co-Authorship Index (CAI), Collaborative Co-efficient (CC)


The contributions of literature in the field of Neuroanatomy in MEDLINE database which covered in PubMed is discussed in this paper. The literature covered in the database all through the years i.e. 1980-2019 was taken into consideration for this study. MEDLINE concealed the maximum of 9350 records in the field of Neuroanatomy. The United States is the prime publisher in the field of Neuroanatomy literature as per this study. 96.33% of records covered in English language in this analysis. There is a fluctuation trend in the study of Relative Growth Rate (RGR) and also in Doubling time (Dt) when calculated by year-wise. A complete of 85.71% of papers is written by way of multi-authors. The ratio represents the single and multi-authors’ papers is 1:7 in the area of Neuroanatomy literature. It was determined that meager percent i.e. 0.46% of records represent nameless authorship. The year-wise Degree of Collaboration shows the ratio in-between 0.38 to 0.94 in the field of Neuroanatomy literature. The Co-Authorship Index (CAI) for greater than two authors’ papers was lower in the first, second, and third blocks and enriched in the fourth block in this study. The average Collaborative Co-efficient (CC) has been arrived at 0.55 which indicates huge wide variety of contributions became by multiple authors papers in the subject of Neuroanatomy literature. The total study exposed that the multi-authors’ papers are lead in the Neuroanatomy research. It additionally indicates that the collaboration in Neuroanatomy research is in a growing trend in current years.


Morillo, F., Bordons M., & Gomez, I. (2001). An approach to interdisciplinary through bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 51(1), 203-22.

Devarajan, G. (Ed). (1997). Bibliometric Studies. ESS Publication, New Delhi, 1-9.

Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroanatomy.

Macias-Chapula, C. A. (2000). AIDS in Haiti: a bibliometric analysis. Bulletin of Medical Library Association, 88(1), 56-61.

Hartinah, S. et al., (2001). Indonesian Nutrition Research Papers 1979-2000: A Bibliometric Analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics: Bibliometrics & Informetrics Research Group; Sydney [Australia]. 225-34.

Divya Srivastava. (2004). Collaborative Activity in the Field of Biomedical Sciences: A Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Publications. In: Information and knowledge Management in Health Sciences: Newer Perspectives MLAI 2004 National Convention, 2004. Dr.ALM Post Graduate Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Madras; Chennai (India), 181-96.

Ramesh Babu, B. & Ramakrishnan, J. (2007). Trends in the Growth of Literature on Hepatitis (1984-2003). Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 38(2), 31-50.

Ramakrishnan, J. & Ramesh Babu, B. (2007). Literature on hepatitis (1984-2003): A bibliometric analysis. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 54,195-200.

Ramesh Babu, B. & Ramakrishnan, J. (2008). National Patterns of Research output and Priorities in Hepatitis: a Scientometric Analysis. Journal of Information Management, 39(4), 215-240.

Hunt, R. (1978). Plant growth analysis: London: Edward Arnold.

Blackman, V. H. (1919). The compound interest law and plant Growth. Annals of Botany, 33,353-360.

Mahapatra, M. (1985). On the Validity of the theory of Exponential Growth of Scientific Literature. Proceedings of the 15th IASLIC Conference, Bangalore, 61-70.

Subramanyam, K. (1993). Bibliometric Studies of Research Collaboration: A Review. Journal of Information Science, 6, 33-38.

Garg, K.C. & Padhi, P. (2001). A study of collaboration in laser science and technology. Scientometrics, 51, 415-427.

Ajiferuke, Q, Burrel, J. & Tauge. (1988). Collaborative Coefficient: A single measure of the Degree of Collaborations in research. Scientometrics, 14, 421-433.




How to Cite

Ramakrishnan, J., Ravi Sankar, G., & Thavamani, K. (2022). A Scientometric Study on Neuroanatomy Literature. Indian Journal of Information Sources and Services, 12(1), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.51983/ijiss-2022.12.1.3102

Most read articles by the same author(s)