The purpose of this study is to construct a model for measuring the strength and weakness of individual disciplines. The model is based on balanced approach, and is tested on Malaysian social sciences publications during 1999 -2008 as a case study. Findings indicate that the differences in rankings for measures of publication output, citation distribution, and mean observed citation rate are large, which justifiy the use of scientific power index.

Background The Neonatal period is one of the most dangerous and vulnerable stages of life. The importance of neonates' mortality has led to national and international efforts, notably as research and scientific studies. However, different aspects and patterns of the scientific productivity in the field have not yet been studied. The present study aimed to investigate the scientific production in the field of "Neonates’ health" in Scopus. Materials and Methods Using a scientometric method, the present study tries to identify and analyze a sample of 2, 842 neonates’-health-related items indexed by Scopus during 1914 to 2014. After some preparation and refinement, the data were analyzed by Excel 2010, using descriptive and analytical statistics including frequency, percentile, and regression models (P <0. 01). Results The Neonates’ Health field showed to be growing on an exponential basis. Its authorship pattern adheres to Lotka's law in that the number of authors decreases as their publications increase on a power basis. The field is revealed to be globally distributed, within a wide language variation and a wide range of countries. USA is the most prolific country in Neonates’ Health. "The Pediatrics" journal ranks first among the fields’ core journals. Research articles are the dominant document type, implying the field’ s research-oriented nature. Conclusion The field’ s exponential growth model and its adherence to Lotka’ s law mark its similarity to established science systems implying it to be establishing and sustaining its research realm. The language and geographical diversity of the Neonates’ Health signifies the world's concerns for research in the field, though at a very low and unbalanced level. Consequently, the Neonates’ Health seems to get progressively developed throughout the world. This promises an improvement in neonatal health and well-being in a not-far future.

Productivity can be studied from different dimensions such as energy efficiency, capital, manpower, equipment, etc. Productivity of human resources is one of its most important dimensions and the correct use of other resources also depends on its productivity. Identifying and describing productivity indicators in different dimensions is one of the basic steps of productivity management. This is especially important in scientific and technological organizations. In the current study, the statistical population includes managers and experts of scientific and technological organizations. In this article, the mentioned indicators, with a sample size of 350 were reviewed through a questionnaire using qualitative methods of content analysis and content analysis and confirmatory factor analysis using MAXQDA, SPSS and AMOS software. The results revealed five general indicators: "effective and efficient planning", "financial and technological factors", "motivation, commitment and teamwork spirit", "competitiveness and development" and "knowledge, skills and system thinking" as the most important indicators of human resource productivity in scientific and technological organizations. The indicator of knowledge, skills and system thinking has the lowest coefficient and that of effective and efficient planning has the highest coefficient in the final model. Accordingly, to increase the productivity of their human resources, scientific and technological organizations should pay special attention to team building skills, development of decentralized decision processes, strengthening the spirit of participation along with factors such as improving the quality of equipment, technologies and financial issues.

Introduction: Universities as one of the main sources for producing scientific information, play an important role in the development of the society. So, it is necessary to monitor their research activities. This study investigates the situation of producing scientific information by faculty members of Kermanshah University of Medical sciences during 1993-2002. Methods: In this descriptive study, a valid and reliable questionnaire and related documents were used for gathering the data. All full time faculty members (210) were studied through census sampling method. The data was analyzed by descriptive statistics and SPSS software. Results: The total number of scientific products, in all forms, produced by faculty members was 2956. The most produced scientific information was in the form of thesis (42.82%) and the highest percentage of scientific information production was done in 2001 (16.05%). School of Medicine had the highest percentage in scientific information production (82.8%). Articles published in foreign journals (73) as the most creditable products were done by 31 of faculty members (15.2%) and the majority of internal articles produced by 131 of them (64.5%). Only 20% of research projects were presented as scientific articles. Conclusion: Translating and compiling books are performed in a very small number and publishing the results of research projects is very limited also. It is recommended to provide more facilities for publishing scientific articles.

Purpose: One of the most important scientific components is the scientific productivity of authors. This concept, which does not have a clear definition in the literature, has been investigated in various researches. Also, the review of the literature shows the dispersion of the subject in this field. From the individual and personality characteristics of the authors to the role of environmental and social issues on scientific productivity, attention has been paid in this field. It is not known, correctly, what is the emphasis of the related literature? And which are the trends and the hot topics of this field? So, the main goal of the present study was to investigate and illustrate trends and hot topics that pertain to authors’ scientific productivity.Methodology: The current research is practical in terms of purpose and has been carried out with a scientometric approach using knowledge mapping. To achieve this, 6482 publications from 2000 to 2022 were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection database and analyzed using CiteSpace Software (Advanced version). In alignment with the study's objective, keyword co-occurrence (to identify clusters), betweenness centrality (to pinpoint research frontiers), and citation burstness (to highlight significant works, hot topics, and keywords in specific periods) indicators were utilized. Additionally, clustering was conducted. Finally, the historical developments and milestones of this field were analyzed through a timeline view.Findings: Findings showed that out of the data extracted, 11 clusters with a density of 0.0438 and a harmonic mean of 0.4938 were identified - which indicates weak interconnections in the network. The most important clusters were “h-Index” (size=284), “gender” (size=244), and “research effects” (size=202). Other clusters related to authors’ scientific productivity included “technology transfer”, “social work education”, “social network analysis”, “academic promotion”, “incentive structure”, “references”, “teamwork”, and “scientometric analysis” based on their sizes. Hirsch’s work in 2005, with a value of 0.27, held the highest betweenness centrality. An analysis of works' citation burstiness suggested that the works in the scientific productivity domain had experienced two citation burstiness periods: the first period involved the presentation and evaluation of the “h-Index” (from 2000 to 2012), and the second period focused on the evaluation and development of “existing tools” to assess authors’ scientific productivity (from 2012 to 2022). The hot topics under study were “evaluating academic communities” (2000-2002), “authors’ ranking indicators” (2002-2018), and “knowledge exchange” (2018-2022). The subject of “knowledge exchange”, a new issue, focuses on international interactions, communications, and the social and economic effects of literature (in addition to their scientific effects). The history of authors’ scientific productivity began with Lotka's rule of works’ creators’ scientific productivity, followed by the introduction of “citations” as one of the most important evaluation criteria for authors’ scientific productivity, developed by Garfield. In addition to Hirsch’s work, other approaches, such as “mapping of science” software and “gender inequalities”, were used to trace the historical developments of scientific productivity.Conclusion: According to the findings of the present research, the H-index remains the most crucial index for evaluating the scientific productivity of authors. Despite some flaws, this index claims to measure both the impact and quantity of scientific productivity of authors and is widely accepted by the scientific community. It indicates that as the number of works increases, the likelihood of receiving citations also increases, leading to enhanced scientific productivity. Given that the scientific productivity of authors, researchers, and university faculty members is vital for employment, it is imperative to enhance academic and scientific positions during employment processes. The results of this study could provide assistance to experts and researchers alike.

Export is one of the determinants of business development and sustainable economic growth, which in the modern economy is strongly influenced by superior technology and economic complexity index. Since scientific productivity provides the conditions for the acquisition of superior technology, therefore, to the extent that export development can be tailored to the export-oriented characteristics of non-renewable sources in developing countries, the challenge is to what extent has the growth of scientific productivity been able to affect the export of high-tech in developing countries? The main purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of the scientific productivity index on high-tech exports of G15 developing countries during 2000-2018; using Panel Data Vector Autoregressive (PVAR) method. The results show that in a 10-yearly period, generating a shock in scientific productivity has a positive effect on high technology exports and over time the impact of increasing scientific productivity on high technology exports increases. Moreover, a positive shock in financial risk, initially leads to an everincreasing export of high technology exports but the effects are not permanent and diminishes after about 4 years. The economic risk also has a positive effect on increasing high technology exports, while the impact of political risk is negligible on high technology exports in the long and short term. The results of variance decomposition also show that the variables with high technology export, economic risk and scientific productivity have the most impact on the high technology export respectively. Financial risk has little effect and political risk has the least impact on high-tech exports.

This study was carried out to evaluate scientific production in the area of change management with the aims of reflecting knowledge growth, highlight the weaknesses and strengths of the databases, and to assist researchers to manage and plan their future work  in their fields of interest. This is a survey study and its subjects of study were all titles indexed in Thomson Reuter’s databases in this area from 1990 to 2009. Findings showed that 2530 documents have been indexed during this period. Most documents have been published between 2006 and 2010. The annual growth rate for publications is 78.80 percent.  Findings also show that 6,105 authors have been involved in the production of this number of titles among them S. Lee is at the top and Penamora, Hicks, Towill were at the second and third places. These documents have been produced by 80 countries among them U.S. and England were at the first and second places. 1173 journals published this amount of documents among them “Journal of Organizational Change Management” occupied the first rank. These documents have been published in 11 different languages of which English was the prominent language. They have been published in 12 different formats, of which article was the prominent one. This number of documents has received 20,778 citations, totally. The article titled "Tightening the iron cage-concertive control in self-managing Teams” received 401 citations, placing it at the top of the list.