Revistas más citadas en las patentes sobre coronavirus según Lens.org
On Sale
€10.00
€10.00
Resumen: Se analiza la bibliografía científica citada en patentes sobre coronavirus con el objetivo de conocer sus características e identificar las principales revistas, valorando la posible correspondencia del impacto de estas publicaciones tanto en el ámbito científico como en el tecnológico. Para este propósito se ha utilizado el buscador de patentes Lens.org y sus dos conjuntos de patentes predefinidos sobre los coronavirus, uno de carácter general y otro más específico (tratamiento y vacunas). Entre los resultados resalta la utilidad del uso de identificadores persistentes y metadatos bibliográficos extraídos de otras plataformas académicas-científicas como Microsoft Academic o PubMed, entre otras. Sin embargo, se requiere una depuración y normalización de los datos bibliográficos en Lens ya que se han detectado duplicidades. Aunque las revistas más citadas, Journal of virology y Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, sí que presentan una similitud en su posicionamiento en las primeras posiciones de los rankings de Journal Citation Reports (JCR) y de Lens, el resto de revistas más citadas en patentes sobre los coronavirus no son de alto impacto según el índice JCR de la Web of Science. Se evidencian desigualdades en la comparativa del impacto científico con respecto al tecnológico de las revistas citadas en patentes, precisándose otros indicadores diferentes a los bibliométricos tradicionales para valorar a las revistas científicas citadas en patentes desde la vertiente tecnológica.
Abstract: The scientific literature cited in patents on coronaviruses is analyzed with the aim of determining its characteristics, identifying the main journals, and evaluating the possible correspondence between the impact of these publications in the scientific and technological fields. For this purpose, the Lens.org patent search engine and its two predefined sets of patents on coronaviruses were used, one of a general nature and the other more specific (on treatments and vaccines). Among the results, the use of persistent identifiers and bibliographic metadata extracted from other academic-scientific platforms such as Microsoft Academic or PubMed, among others, stands out. However, debugging and standardization of the bibliographic data in Lens is required, because duplications have been detected. Although the most cited journals, namely the Journal of Virology and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, do present a similarity in their positioning in the top positions of the rankings of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) and Lens, the rest of the journals that are most cited in patents on coronaviruses do not have high impact according to the JCR index of the Web of Science. Inequalities are evident when comparing the scientific with the technological impact of the journals cited in patents, and indicators other than traditional bibliometrics are needed to evaluate scientific journals cited in patents from the technological perspective.
Abstract: The scientific literature cited in patents on coronaviruses is analyzed with the aim of determining its characteristics, identifying the main journals, and evaluating the possible correspondence between the impact of these publications in the scientific and technological fields. For this purpose, the Lens.org patent search engine and its two predefined sets of patents on coronaviruses were used, one of a general nature and the other more specific (on treatments and vaccines). Among the results, the use of persistent identifiers and bibliographic metadata extracted from other academic-scientific platforms such as Microsoft Academic or PubMed, among others, stands out. However, debugging and standardization of the bibliographic data in Lens is required, because duplications have been detected. Although the most cited journals, namely the Journal of Virology and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, do present a similarity in their positioning in the top positions of the rankings of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) and Lens, the rest of the journals that are most cited in patents on coronaviruses do not have high impact according to the JCR index of the Web of Science. Inequalities are evident when comparing the scientific with the technological impact of the journals cited in patents, and indicators other than traditional bibliometrics are needed to evaluate scientific journals cited in patents from the technological perspective.