key: cord-0013204-pgrc632d
authors: McManus, Concepta; Baeta Neves, Abilio Afonso; Maranhão, Andrea Queiroz; Souza Filho, Antonio Gomes; Santana, Jaime Martins
title: International collaboration in Brazilian science: financing and impact
date: 2020-10-10
journal: Scientometrics
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03728-7
sha: 0f7f1a53977d9beaa90f30721490ea8027a9fdf6
doc_id: 13204
cord_uid: pgrc632d

The study of international collaborations can help in understanding the benefits of such relationships and aid in developing national financing policies. In this paper, the international collaboration of Brazilian scientists was studied using SciVal(®) and Incites(®) database, looking at its effect on the universities, financing agencies and different areas of knowledge and research topic clusters. Cluster and principal component analyses of scientometric data were carried out. While the results confirmed known knowledge that international collaboration increases impact, this study shows that Brazilian researchers are contributing to prominent research topics worldwide, in all areas of knowledge. This finding is contrary to several points of view that identify Brazil as a regional and not an international partner in science. Important also to note the impact of Brazilian authors in international collaboration that is well above the world mean. The collaboration of Brazil with foreign partners brings benefits for both sides, creating the opportunity of Brazilian research access to financing from international agencies. Increases in measures of impact are also seen for both sides. Foreign partners likewise benefit from higher impact factors in the same topic cluster, when collaborating with Brazilian partners. Publishing open access in high impact journals is fundamental for maintaining Brazilian science at the forefront. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11192-020-03728-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The concept of collaboration, a partnership or co-operation (CPC) in science and research means that the different actors make efforts to achieve a common goal (Teixeira da Silva 2011). This collaboration can be local, national or international. The competition to publish the research results in high impact, international journals are made harder by the ongoing, exponential generation of knowledge, as well as the costs of this publication (McManus et al. In press) . According to Adams (2013) , the fourth age of research (the first three being the individual, the institutional and the national) is characterized by international collaborations among elite research groups. This author claims that institutions that do not form international collaborations risk progressive disenfranchisement, and countries that do not nurture their talent will lose out it entirely. Areas such as the Social Sciences and Humanities show an impact that cannot be measured by conventional bibliometric tools (Bulaitis 2017) . These include the areas of culture, diplomacy and politics, as well as practice. These areas also tend to show more local impact (Mugnaini et al. 2014 ) and that those captured by bibliographic resources are more widely disseminated. Nevertheless, the present study looks at international publications and collaboration of which these areas show low representation.

Drivers of international collaboration include mass data storage, grand challenges, electronic communications (Barjak et al. 2013) , and less expensive travel (Adams 2012) , as well as specific policy implementation by governments. According to Boekholt et al. (2009) other drivers include to improve the quality, scope and critical mass in science and research by linking national resources and knowledge with resources and knowledge in other countries to obtain access to state-of-the-art knowledge abroad as well to attract state-of-the-art knowledge or people to the 'home' country. The same authors show that in less Research & Development (R&D) developed countries an important driver is to build up national Science, Technology & Innovation (STI) capabilities through cooperation. Therefore important drivers are improving national competitiveness, supporting less developed countries by developing STI capabilities, tackling global societal challenges and creating good and stable diplomatic relationships (and indirectly ensuring international security). Joeng et al. (2014) suggest that substantial financial and attentional resources, academic excellence, individual motivation, and active informal communication play significant roles in international collaboration.

The network of international co-authorship is expanding globally (Leydesdorff et al. 2013) , thus leading to changes in scientific relationships among countries. For example, the above authors show that scientific ties between Latin America countries are lower than those with Spain and Portugal, and that Spanish and Portuguese speaking countries dominate this relationship.

The citation impact of publications with one or more international partners is well-documented . The support in collaboration is not only at the level of scientific rigour and infrastructure (Hoekman et al. 2010) , the efficient exploitation of scientific efforts (Catalá-López et al. 2014 ), but also language and writing style, thus increasing the likelihood of acceptance of a manuscript audience (Zeng et al. 2011) . This means that the science and data are exposed to a wider audience, driving questions and criticism, improving the quality of the manuscript and future research, as well as invitations for new collaborations. According to Wagner et al. (2017) , international connections increase novelty and are more likely to be constituted by well-reputed nodes. These arrangements are attractive to other researchers seeking to enhance their own reputations. Globally connected researchers can, in turn, be highly selective in choosing the next entrant into the network.

This analysis represents Brazilian international scientific cooperation before the onset of Covid-19. It, therefore, serves as a benchmark to evaluate the effects of the pandemic on Brazilian science and its impact internationally. The understanding of the impact of international collaboration on national scientific production is important to direct public policies and understand underlying trends. The present study looks at Brazilian scientific output and impact in collaboration with countries, universities and financing agencies, to aid in forming public policies on financing and internationalization of Brazilian science. The indicators point out that some science policies of the Brazilian funding agencies were successful.

Two international subscription based databases were used to collect data. InCites ® belongs to Clarivate Analytics and uses data from the Web of Science, while SciVal ® is from Elsevier and based on Scopus data. Each database provides different types of data.

Incites ® was used to evaluate the relationship of Brazilian scientists with their internal and external partners as well as the institutions financing these relationships, from 2004 to 2019. The data was divided by OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) area of knowledge (Natural Science, Engineering & Technology, Agriculture, Medicine & Health, Social Sciences and Humanities). Data were examined by major collaborating countries and universities, as well as financing agencies in Brazil and abroad. From Incites ® , the impact of this collaboration was examined looking at Number of documents in Web of Science (Wos), CNCI (Category Normalized Citation Index), Percentage documents in Top 1 and 10% (%Top1%; %Top10%), Percentage of papers in Q1 and Q2 journals (%Q1; %Q2), open access (%OA), industry collaborations (%Ind) and citations per document (Cit/doc), JIF (Journal Impact Factor), JNCI (Journal Normalised Citation Impact), % Highly cited (%High) and Hot (%Hot) papers, % Documents Cited (%DocCit), and % DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) Gold documents (All abbreviations are shown at the end of this document). Source of financing of collaborative publications was also identified, whether by government agencies or private companies. Differences were seen in quality indicators due to publishing open or closed access by funding agency.

Topic Clusters (collection of documents with a common focused intellectual interest), their prominence (which indicates momentum and visibility of the topic due to very recent citations, views and CiteScore) and their frequencies were collected from SciVal ® from 2014 to 2019 by knowledge area, i.e., the analysis is focused on the current trend. These were divided by the number of publications worldwide in these topic clusters and those in collaboration with Brazilian authors, including FWCI (Field Weighted Citation Impact) of these topics worldwide, FWCI in collaboration with Brazilian authors, citations per paper, SJR (Scientific Journal Ranking) and Citescore ( reflects the yearly average number of citations to recent articles in a Journal). Number of authors per publication and per region were also obtained from SciVal ® .

These data are downloaded from the platforms in.csv and.xlsx formats respectively which enables them to be analsyed in the statistical programs. All statistical analyses were carried out using SAS v. 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina). As several indicators were involved, correlation (PROC CORR) were were carried out to examine the relationship between these quality criteria and then principal component (PROC PRINCOMP) analyses used to transform these criteria into a smaller number of uncorrelated variables. The first principal component accounts for as much of the variability in the data as possible, and each succeeding component accounts for as much of the remaining variability as possible. Growth in the number of collaborations with foreign universities and researchers was examined using polynomial regression (PROC REG).

The number of papers published abroad by Brazilian authors is increasing at the same rate as the total number of papers published (Fig. 1) . While the number of papers published in Brazilian journals with foreign partners is low and stable, those with foreign partners published abroad is increasing. Most papers published with foreign partners were in foreign journals. Table 1 shows the mean values for collaborations over all areas of knowledge for the top 20 countries collaborating with Brazil. The USA has approximately 3 times the next highest collaborator. In terms of main collaborators by area of knowledge ( Supplementary  Fig. 1) , there is little difference among the top 20, with some changes in the order of major contributors. Current (May 2020) levels of international collaborations are at 40.55%, up from 24.18% in 2009. In 2019, Brazil researchers published approximately 67,000 papers in the Web of Science of which about 26,000 were in collaboration with researchers from other countries (38.9%). Table 2 and Fig. 2 show that most quality indicators are positively correlated with each other. The number of documents published per country had little effect on quality indicators. Publishing in a journal with a high impact factor shows documents with higher citation impact and higher chance of being cited. In the second vector hot papers are associated with high JNCI and CNCI, but lower % of cited documents. This may be a result of an immediacy factor.

The major contributors are stable over time (Table 3 and Supplementary Fig. 2 ). Spain becomes more important, with the position of France decreasing, Portugal is also increasing, while counties such as Chile, Switzerland and Russia appear once only. In 2005 was the last time that Japan appeared and Portugal entered. In 2010 Australia entered while in 2015 Argentina left and in the last period the Netherlands entered. 

The Natural and Medical sciences show the highest collaborations in terms of number of institutions and funding sources ( Table 4 ). The Social Sciences and Humanities show low levels of interaction with foreign collaborators in the databases examined. From Fig. 3 and Supplementary Figure 3 , it can be seen that, in general, collaboration within Brazil has lower impact than collaboration with foreign partners. The University of São Paulo (USP) is the institution with highest collaboration in the country in terms of number of papers published (Fig. 3B ). Foreign collaborators are mainly North American Fig. 3 and 4) . The Engineering and technologies, for example, show high collaboration with Portuguese universities, as do the Humanities and Social Sciences.

Of the 8262 institutions with which Brazil has collaborated with, 771 are responsible for 80% of the production (Fig. 4) . These change depending on the area of knowledge (Supplementary Fig. 5) , with the number of institutions that are responsible for 80% of publications with Brazilian authors are 7.99% of the institutions for Natural Sciences, 15.39% for Engineering, 15.27% for Medical Sciences, 16.31% for Agricultural Sciences, 23.00% for Social Sciences and 47.05% for Humanities. This may indicate that, while in some areas, such as Natural Sciences, there is the formation of research networks, the lack of concentration in Humanities may reflect a more eventual collaboration. In terms of the number of documents, 12 countries are responsible for 80% of the scientific production. The number of institutions abroad and researchers has been growing exponentially since 1985 (all were quadratic equations with R 2 > 0.99 for institutions and R 2 > 0.88 for researchers). Humanities, Agricultural and Social Sciences have not grown at the same rate as other areas. In terms of foreign sources of financing, there was a rapid growth during the years 2000.

Looking at the number of authors by publication (Table 5) , SciVal ® identified 213 collaborating countries/regions with 144,364 co-authored publications between 2014 and 2019. Publications with Africa and the Middle East tended to show a larger group of coauthors, as did publications in Medical and Agricultural Sciences, although Engineering and Natural Sciences showed a higher participation in publications with more than 100 authors. This is due to increase participation of Brazilian researchers in large international Table 3 Major country collaborators with Brazilian authors over time Order 1985 Order -1990 Order 1990 Order -1995 Order 1995 Order -2000 Order 2000 Order -2005 Order 2005 Order -2010 efforts by means of collaboration network such as collaborations for using large facilities in high energy physics, or international genomics projects. The major Brazilian universities and research institutions collaborating with foreign partners (Fig. 5) show that smaller institutions acting in a specific field (CBPF in physics and Fiocruz in Medical Sciences and Health) show higher impact than the larger, more generalized, universities.

Several universities and institutions appear in all areas of knowledge such as the University of São Paulo (USP), as well as Federal Universities of Minas Gerais (UFMG) and Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) ( Supplementary Fig. 6 ). Others appear in specific 1  214  427  640  853  1066  1279  1492  1705  1918  2131  2344  2557  2770  2983  3196  3409  3622  3835  4048  4261  4474  4687  4900  5113  5326  5539  5752  5965  6178  6391  6604  6817  7030  7243  7456  7669 Bubble size -% Docs Cited

Financing (local and foreign) in Brazilian science increased after 2006 (Fig. 6 ). There are 831 registered international financing sources in Brazilian Science, with most financing abroad coming from North America and Europe, in all areas of knowledge ( Supplementary  Fig. 7 ). Many are universities or research institutions and not financing agencies as such.

The NIH and NSF are major financiers of Brazilian cooperation, as are DFG, DAAD, Alexander von Humboldt, the EU and CNRS (Fig. 7) . Some areas show specific sources More papers were published in open access compared to closed access in collaboration with foreign partners. There were 21.32 more citations per paper (Table 6) , thus leading to an increase in CNCI of 1.94 and JNCI of 1.06. There was a lower % of papers in Q2 journals and lower % of industry collaborations in open access papers. All other indicators were higher. 

The two main areas with industrial collaboration are Medical and Engineering and Technology (E&T). Figure 9 shows that while in the E & T area financing is mainly by funding agencies, in the Medical Sciences some private philantropic foundations are seen to finance as well as private companies. In the other areas, collaboration maximum varies from 1 to 2%.

There is considerable similarity between the most published topic clusters worldwide and those where Brazilian authors are collaborating (Fig. 10) , showing that, in collaboration, Brazil is contributing to the major study areas worldwide. In the areas of Natural Science, Medical and Engineering & Technologies, Brazilian scientists appeared in almost all of the top 500 clusters in these areas. In terms of impact, Table 7 shows that, compared with world impact in the same areas, Brazilian authors in collaboration in these prominent clusters is higher than the world mean. This is especially evident in the Medical Sciences. In international collaboration, Brazil publishes more in the areas that show higher prominence worldwide ( Supplementary  Fig. 10) . The first principal component shows that the quality parameters used (FWCI Brazil and World, SNIP, Citescore, numbers of citations, Prominence as well as outputs worldwide and Brazil in collaboration) are positively correlated. In the second component, there is a subset of a lower number of papers per cluster that are highly cited and have a higher impact for Brazil than worldwide but have lower prominence.

At this time, also, the need for international collaboration becomes more prevalent (Hossain, 2020) . According to Adams (2013) , there is a growing divide between the quality of international and domestic research. This will influence each nation's ability to draw on the global knowledge base, and could, in turn, compromise national scientific wealth. The isolation will cause a gradual financial and intellectual separation between institutions into those that are primarily international and those that are mostly national. Such a departure could lead to the erosion of adequate regional competency for future research training and collaboration and for knowledge flow to the national industrial base. This is especially important in a country such as Brazil where international collaboration is relatively new but is growing exponentially ( Fig. 1 and 4) . 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 (2020) showed that areas of knowledge differ in publishing practices and languages. This is also evident in the present study in relation to partnerships in publishing and in agreement with Choi et al. (2015) . Here also, impact of the different areas in collaboration can be seen, so policies for improving impact but be relevant for the area in question. While this is still incipient in the Humanities and Social Sciences, it should be remembered that publications in collaboration are not common in these areas but are increasing (Haddow et al. 2017) . The present study goes beyond that seen by Martinez and Sá (2020) who stated that engagement with the academic Anglosphere is necessary for highly cited status, derived from co-authored publications with collaborators from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Here, despite the importance of these countries, non-Anglophone countries were also important for Brazilian collaborations. The focus of the cited paper was the researcher, different from here. Nevertheless, these authors found that international experience was important for the production of papers with a high number of citations.

The relationship with France and Germany may be a reflection of the language barrier, as well as cultural and historical ties. French universities are also evident in the Engineering and Technology areas (de Sandes-Guimaraes et al. 2020 ). This may be due to the creation of specific programs, such as the 40 year old Brafitec program (Grochocki and Guimarães 2017) based on undergraduate student mobility from the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (Capes, Brazilian Ministry of Education) and the CAPES-Cofecub agreement (Nunes 2006) . While US and English universities are visible in all areas, the lack of German universities is notable, given Brazil´s history of co-financing with German agencies such as DFG, DAAD, Alexander von Humboldt and BMBF (Schuch and Hellingrath 2014) , as seen in Fig. 7 . Only Helmholtz and Max Plank appear among the main German research institutions.

While Leta and Chaimovich (2002) found higher impact with collaborative vs noncollaborative publications, they stated that higher impact values were observed within publications coauthored with Argentina and Chile. This is not true in the present study, whereby cofinanced studies with these countries had a lower impact than Northern Hemisphere collaborations. The number of institutions with which Brazilian authors are collaborating has been steadily increasing over time. As more institutions, regions and researchers in Brazil enter the postgraduate system, where over 95% of research is carried out in Brazil (McManus and Neves 2020), the demand for collaboration increases. Programs such as Science without Borders (McManus and Nobre 2017) increased Brazilian presence abroad but does not seem to have changed the growth in the number of collaborating institutions or researchers (2011 -2016) .

In terms of the financing agencies, impact increases with foreign financing. It should be noted that Brazil finances mainly mobility, such as sandwich doctorates or visiting lecturers abroad for 6 months or one year, rather than collaborating with financing for research projects. This type of financing is important as it introduces the Brazilian student or researcher to groups abroad, it works as a seed from which collaboration can grow, if it does not already exist. Collaboration also improves the quality of future generations of researchers, which is important for a developing country (Huang and Lin 2010) . This sets the need for Brazilian agencies to look at their financing procedures to improve these indicators. Also, the main financers for international collaboration in the Medical sciences are private companies (Fig. 9) , which also may indicate a higher competition for research grants. This area also tends to show the highest impact of all areas. A broad basis of financing sources increases options for Brazilian researchers to maintain collaboration, especially in times of financial restriction.

Geographically dispersed research collaborations, however, impose search and coordination costs for bridging geographic distance and institutional differences (Cummings and Kiesler 2007) . These authors highlight that, due to these costs, multi-institute collaborations tend to have less frequent and less effective coordination, leading to more conflict, free-riding, lack of monitoring and diverging interests (Hinds and Bailey 2003) . In line with Hoekman et al. (2010) , this study showed that regions and countries differ in their propensity to collaborate (Table 1 ). The previous authors attribute this to differences in size, quality and accessibility. In the case of Brazil, mainly in the life and exact sciences, researchers contribute significantly to research efforts in distant rather than geographically close collaborations. In part, this may reflect the size of the country which is the largest in South America. Nevertheless, further investigation is needed into research networks with Brazilian authors in order to get a more detailed picture.

McManus et al. (In press) showed the cost of publishing in open access in international journals. These authors show that the correlation between the cost of publishing and the number of citations was positive and significant. Effective international collaboration can help in the payment of these fees and thereby help in increasing the impact of local research.

According to Martinez and Sá (2020) , Brazil exerts regional leadership in scientific production in Latin America but remains relatively peripheral to global science. This is not seen here, where Brazilian researchers are seen to be effectively collaborating to world prominent themes of high impact and to advance the innovative science. In fact, in terms of international collaboration, there has been an increase not only in numbers but also in the quality of the production. This has not been due to a specific public policy, but to a convergence of different efforts from agencies, institutions and the research community. Although financing for bilateral or multilateral projects has existed for some time (for example Cofecub with France, or programs with DFG or DAAD in Germany), only with the launch of the PrInt program (Program for Institutional Internationalization) (Arruda 2017) was international collaboration and impact defined as an institutional priority. Leta and Chaimovich (2002) studied Brazilian collaboration from 1981 to 1999 and found that at that time collaborations we mainly with European and Central & North American institutions, while Middle East and African countries constituted about 1.5%. Westphal (2013) looks at the role of Capes (which at present is the largest financing agency in Brazil) in the process of internationalization of graduate education and therefore research collaboration in Brazil, noting that this began effectively from the year 2000 with bilateral agreements to cofund research projects between university lecturers and stimulate student exchange. One of the major factors in opening Brazil to collaboration is the creation of a publications portal (Portal de Peridiocos) which, since 2000, has been maintained by Capes (Atallah and Puga 2007) . This portal (https ://www. perio dicos .capes .gov.br/) provides free access to 414 institutions in Brazil and hundreds of thousands of university lecturers and students at their desktops. Increase in Brazilian collaboration is seen to steadily increase from this point. At the end of 2018 this base had 48,325 scientific jounals, as well as books, reports, and other databases of complete texts, references and abstracts, patentes, books, and statistics. According to Chinchilla-Rodríguez et al. (2010) , in the Latin-American realm, Brazil is a country with high internal but low external collaboration. This may be in part due to the fact that most science in Brazil is carried out in post-graduate courses in public universities. This system has increased by 100% in the last 10 years . Visibility of Brazilian research, and therefore citation rates, also depends on the area of knowledge and who the international partner is (Chinchilla-Rodríguez et al. 2010) . stated that international collaboration also led to an increase in citation impact, reaching almost five times the world average. This is also more evident here, where the analysis of topic clusters showed that Brazilian authors are collaborating at a high level in all areas of knowledge. While this paper deals with published papers, international collaboration and its impact should not be limited solely to this subject. As this study is based on bibliometric databases (Incites ® and Scival ® ), several factors are not examined, especially in the Humanities and Social Sciences. These areas, along with Agriculture, many times deal with specific problems of the country but international collaboration can be used to improve the quality of knowledge generated whose main concepts are universal and then contribute to overall science. This paper also does not examine the size or stability of research networks. Bozeman et al. (2013) reviewed the effect of collaborations (Individual and institutional collaboration and collaborator attributes) on collaboration choices and outcomes.

Several studies compare these databases (Gray and Price 2020; Springer and Milligan, 2017) . Waltman (2016) describes the databases and a short history and coverage, as well as a discussion on differences in Social Sciences and Humanities, overrepresentation of English language journals, and conference proceedings. Mongeon and Paul-Hus (2016) , analysing the coverage of journals in WoS and Scopus, found that Scopus covers a much larger number of journals and that almost all journals in WoS are also covered by Scopus. They state that in both databases, Social Sciences and arts and Humanities are underrepresented, as well as an overrepresentation of English-language journals. Citation counts tend to be higher in Scopus than in WoS (e.g., Haddow and Genoni 2010; Kulkarni et al. 2009; Torres-Salinas et al. 2009 ). Depending on the area of knowledge one data base may be better than others, for example Fest et al. (2017) suggest that there is better cover in the Social Sciences in SciVal. Many publications are not in either database. The type of indicator also varies between database, for example funding information, highly cited and hot papers are only available in InCites while Topic Clusters and Prominence only in SciVal ® .

Most of Brazilian international collaboration is seen within small bilateral or individual programs in the major financing agencies such as Capes and CNPq (Ministry of Science, Technolgy and Innovation). Two major noteworthy exceptions are the Science without Borders program (McManus and Nobre 2017) and PrInt Program (Arruda 2017) . The former was mainly based on undergraduate STEM one year scholarships abroad, but suffered due to lack of planning and financial restrictions. Thereby, graduate and visiting lecturer quotas were not met, while finacing was diverted by research and postgraduate courses in Brazil to pay fees abroad, including for periods of English training of students. This led to the creation of a Brazilian based progam Language without borders (Dorigon 2016) to improve English teaching in Brazilian universities. The second progam (PrInt-Program for Institutional Internationalization) underwent extensive planning, with universitites proposing their goals within a fixed annual budget. This program began effectively in August 2018 with the selection of 36 higher education institutions, but together with government attacks on univertity productivity, along with the financial impacts of the COVID crisis leading to severe cuts in the major financing agencies and public universities, threatens this program for discontinuation in the near future. The increase of Brazil in world ranking of publications (Leta et al. 2013 ) is seen to be a combination of internal and external factors including the continuous investment of the public sector in qualifying human resources and improving infrastructure as well as the inclusion of dozens of new Brazilian titles in major scientific databases (Leta 2011) . In 1980 there were six Brazilian journals in Web of Science, while in the period 2010-2020 this increased to 164 journals. The major increase was in the period from 2005 to 2010 (148 journals) up from 30 in the previous period (2000) (2001) (2002) (2003) (2004) (2005) .

As such Brazilian scientists will have to use creativity to maintain and increase international collaboration in the near future, facilitated by the development of information and transportation technologies, better definition of priorties and priority partnerships, as well as strategic cofunding with industry and international partners (Choi 2012 ).

This paper shows that collaboration of Brazillian researchers with foreign partners brings benefits for both sides, with Brazilian authors having access to financing from international agencies. Increase in measure of impact are also seen in these collaborations. Foreign partners also benefit from higher impact factors in the same topic cluster, when collaborating with Brazilian partners. This finding clearly points out a successful convergence of science policies of Brazilian funding agencies with efforts from institutions and researchers in fostering the connection of brazillian science with the international community to move science frontiers forward.

Category Normalized Citation Impact of a document is calculated by dividing the actual count of citing items by the expected citation rate for documents with the same document type, year of publication and subject area. This is used in InCites ® and based on the Web of Science CS CiteScore of an academic journal is a measure reflecting the yearly average number of citations to recent articles published in that journal DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals DocCit Number of documents in the database in the period studied that had at least one citation in the database FWCI Field Weighted Citation Index -is the ratio of the total citations actually received by the denominator's output, and the total citations that would be expected based on the average of the subject field. Similar to CNCI, this is from SciVal ® based on data from Scopus High

Highly cited papers are papers that perform in the top 1% based on the number of citations received when compared to other papers published in the same field in the same year Hot

Hot papers -are papers published in the last two years that are receiving citations quickly after publication. These papers have been cited enough times in the most recent bimonthly period to place them in the top 0.1% when compared to papers in the same field and added to the database in the same period Ind papers published with Industry Collaboration Inter papers published with International Collaboration JCR Journal Citation Reports (JCR) is a resource tool published annually by Thomson Reuters (formerly ISI) to provide citation and publication data of academic journals in the science and Social Science fields JIF Journal impact factor -A tool for evaluating and comparing journals. It is the average number of times articles from the journal published in the past two years have been cited in the JCR year JNCI

The Journal Normalized Citation Impact indicator is a similar indicator to the Normalized Citation Impact, but instead of normalizing per subject area or field, it normalizes the citation rate for the journal in which the document is publishing OA Open Access -is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online, free of cost to the reader or other access barrier Publications in Top Journal Percentiles indicates the extent to which an entity's outputs are present in the most-cited journals in a database source. This metric calculates how many publications, as an absolute count or a percentage, are in the top 1%, 5%, 10% or 25% of the most-cited journals indexed by the database source. An entity can be an institution, a research group or an individual researcher. In this paper we used %Top1% and %Top10% Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 Quartile rankings are therefore derived for each journal in each of its subject categories according to which quartile of the IF distribution the journal occupies for that subject category. Q1 denotes the top 25% of the IF distribution, Q2 for middle-high position (between top 50% and top 25%), Q3 middle-low position (top 75% to top 50%), and Q4 the lowest position (bottom 25% of the IF distribution). In this paper we used %Q1 and %Q2 Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004 and covers three types of sources: book series, journals, and trade journals. All journals covered in the Scopus database, regardless of who they are published under, are reviewed each year. Searches in Scopus also incorporate searches of patent databases SJR Scimago Journal Rank is a measure of the prestige of scholarly journals. The methodology accounts for number of citations as well as the source of citations, with citations from high prestige journals being worth more than those from journals with lower prestige. The prestige value depends on the field, quality and reputation of the source journals that citing article is published in. The average SJR value for all journals in Scopus is 1.000 SNIP Source-normalized Impact per Paper is a field normalised assessment of journal impact. SNIP scores are the ratio of a source's average citation count and 'citation potential'. Citation potential is measured as the number of citations that a journal would be expected to receive for its subject field. SNIP allows for direct comparison between fields of research with different publication and citation practices. A journal with a SNIP of 1.0 has the median (not mean) number of citations for journals in that field STEM refers to the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics areas of knowledge WoS

Web of Science is a website which provides subscription-based access to multiple databases that provide comprehensive citation data for many different academic disciplines. It was originally owned by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and is currently maintained by Clarivate Analytics (previously the Intellectual Property and Science business of Thomson Reuters 

The fourth age of research

Collaborations: The rise of research networks

Brazil's newest attempt at internationalization. Inside higher Ed

CAPES publications portal: a decisive milepost in Brazilian scientific development providing sources of evidence for researchers, students and health professionals

The emerging governance of e-infrastructure

Drivers of international collaboration in research. Study for the European commission

Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The-state-of-the-art

Measuring impact in the humanities: Learning from accountability and economics in a contemporary history of cultural value

Global collaborative networks on meta-analyses of randomized trials published in high impact factor medical journals: a social network analysis

Information Visualization

Core-periphery, new clusters, or rising stars? international scientific collaboration among 'advanced' countries in the era of globalization

Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations

The impact of international student mobility programs on Brazilian students' perceptions of entrepreneurialism

O Programa Idiomas sem Fronteiras Analisado a partir do Ciclo de Políticas. BELT-Brazilian English Language

Bibliometric analysis at Wageningen university and research-comparison of three bibliometric systems

Using InCites responsibly: A guide to interpretation and good practice

A contribuição do programa capes/brafitec para a internacionalização dos cursos de graduação em engenharia no brasil

Citation analysis and peer ranking of Australian Social Science journals

Collaboration in HASS in Australia

Out of sight, out of sync: understanding conflict in distributed teams

Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe

COVID-19): A bibliometric analysis and knowledge mapping

International collaboration and counting inflation in the assessment of national research productivity

On the drivers of international collaboration: The impact of informal communication, motivation, and research resources

Comparisons of citations in web of science, scopus, and google scholar for articles published in general medical journals

Growth of Brazilian science: A real internalization or a matter of databases´ coverage?

Recognition and international collaboration: The Brazilian case

A macro-level study of science in Brazil: seven years later

International Collaboration in Science: The Global Map and the Network

Highly cited in the south: International collaboration and research recognition among Brazil's highly cited researchers. J of Studies in International Education

Brazilian scientific mobility program-science without borderspreliminary results and perspectives. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências

Production Profiles in Brazilian Science, with special attention to Social Sciences and Humanities

Profiles not metrics: The case of Brazilian universities

Brazilian publication profiles: Where and how Brazilian authors publish

The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: A comparative analysis

Scientific communication in Brazil

The science and technology system in Brazil and international cooperation: notes about the Capes/Cofecub experience/O sistema de C&T no Brasil e a cooperacao internacional: notas sobre a experiencia Capes/Cofecub

Bridging Europe and Latin America -The Brazil centre of the university of Münster

Analysis of Publication Trends for DOE National Laboratories Comparisons using WoS and Scopus. United States

The ethics of collaborative authorship More realistic standards and better accountability are needed to enhance scientific publication and give credit where it is due

Ranking of departments and researchers within a university using two different databases: Web of Science versus Scopus

Growth of international collaboration in science: Revisiting six specialties

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators

The internationalization process of graduate studies in Brazil. Cultural and Pedagogical Inquiry

Ethical international scientific writing collaboration, co-operation and partnerships around the world. Case studies and testimonials

Acknowledgements To CAPES and CNPq for financing. AGSF acknowledges the funding from Fundação Cearense de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (FUNCAP) through the Cientista Chefe program.

Cit/Doc Number of citations per document