Search results

The purpose of this article is to examine the structure and determine the MDA framework for use in the development and design of library websites. The topic of innovation in libraries is frequently discussed; thus, we have tried to offer techniques for innovation in website design for libraries.

This study compares these two approaches to determine if the mechanical, dynamic and aesthetic (MDA) framework can also be used to create library websites. Each of the MDA framework’s three components was assessed for their applicability to the development of a library website.

When building a library website, three crucial characteristics that must be carefully taken into account are, among other things, being supporting and safety-oriented; adaptable and accessible; and aesthetically pleasing to the user. Studies have also revealed several additional criteria that may be regarded as success factors for library websites. In addition, there is also a framework for creating touch- and gesture-based interactions. It is also a method for understanding the creation and playing of video games. The acronym MDA stands for the three components of its structure: mechanical, dynamic and aesthetic.

Many kinds of library websites exist, including those for academic, public, school and special libraries. So far, models and approaches for designing pages have been offered for each of these library website categories.

The aim of this study is to examine the bibliometric characteristics of literature published in Nature Nanotechnology in the first 10 years (2006-2015). Yearly output, impact factor (IF) changes, document type, top authors, institutes and countries, most cited articles were examined.

The bibliographic records related to Nature Nanotechnology were retrieved from SCIE of Web of Science. Various software tools such as HistCite, Sci2 tool, intcoll.exe and CitNetExplorer were used.

The results reveals that 55 per cent of publications were citable articles; average number of authors per article was 4.57; 136 per cent increase in impact factor and reviews received highest citations per paper. Harvard University had most number of publications, whereas University of Cambridge had highest CPP among the most productive institutes. Almost 50 per cent of publications were contributed by authors from the USA; 1 per cent of total publications received more than 1,000 citations.

Scientometric analysis of high impact journals has been carried out in very few. Hence, the results of the present study will be useful to compare with low impact journals.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the bibliometric characteristics of papers published in a high impact journal World Psychiatry during the period 2006-2015.

The data for this study were obtained from Thompson Reuters’ “Web of Science”. Publication details were extracted for the journal title “World Psychiatry”. This study covers authorship patterns, annual growth, impact factors, document types, top contributors, international collaborations, highly cited papers and keyword analyses. Software programs such as “Histcite”, “intcoll.exe”, “Pajek” and “Leximancer” were used to analyze the publications.

More than half of the publications were by editorial materials and number of publications from low and middle income countries is very low when compared to proportion of editorial board members. Almost 40 per cent of papers came from the USA and editorial board members had considerable number of papers. Kings College London led the institutions.

Analysis of high impact journals in the field of psychiatry has been carried out in a very few. Hence, the results of this study will be useful to compare with other journals.

The purpose of this paper is to make a quantitative analysis and compare the scientific productivity in the area of engineering among the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries.

The data were collected from SCImago. Various parameters such as number of articles and citable articles, world share and rank, citations per paper and h-index, and international collaboration were analyzed.

There was a fluctuation trend in the pattern of international collaboration among the BRIC countries during the period. Among the top countries, China ranked first in the world in terms of number of articles in the field of engineering research, whereas India was at the 8th rank, Russia was at the 12th rank and Brazil was at the 18th rank. Among the BRIC countries, Russia slipped three positions from being at the 7th rank in 1996 to being at the 10th rank in 2016, while others improved their ranks.

The results of this study reveal publication trends and collaboration pattern of BRIC countries in the field of engineering which may be useful for the academic fraternity and decision makers.