• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

杰出的科技工作者是否平衡其发表论文和申请专利的活动?

Do extraordinary science and technology scientists balance their publishing and patenting activities?

机构信息

Department of Library and Information Science, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.

Center for Research in Econometric Theory and Applications, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Nov 4;16(11):e0259453. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259453. eCollection 2021.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0259453
PMID:34735508
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8568124/
Abstract

This study investigated whether 12 scientists who had received the National Medal of Science and the National Medal of Technology and Innovation balanced publishing and patenting activities. The results demonstrated that although the scientist were recognized for their contributions to science and technology, the majority of recipients were not prolific researchers, and some were not influential. Notably, one scientist had not been granted a single patent. This indicated that scientific and technological contributions may not necessarily correspond with influential scientific publications and patents. Moreover, only two scientists had filed for patents before publishing, and they also invested more time developing technological inventions. Most recipients were science- or technology-oriented scientists. Few scientists balanced their publishing and patenting activities, and demonstrated excellent research and technology performance.

摘要

本研究调查了 12 位获得国家科学奖章和国家技术与创新奖章的科学家是否平衡了发表论文和申请专利的活动。结果表明,尽管这些科学家因其对科学技术的贡献而受到认可,但大多数获奖者并不是多产的研究人员,有些甚至没有影响力。值得注意的是,有一位科学家甚至没有获得一项专利。这表明科学技术贡献不一定与有影响力的科学出版物和专利相对应。此外,只有两位科学家在发表论文之前申请了专利,并且他们还投入了更多的时间开发技术发明。大多数获奖者是专注于科学或技术的科学家。很少有科学家能平衡他们的发表论文和申请专利的活动,并表现出出色的研究和技术绩效。

相似文献

1
Do extraordinary science and technology scientists balance their publishing and patenting activities?杰出的科技工作者是否平衡其发表论文和申请专利的活动?
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 4;16(11):e0259453. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259453. eCollection 2021.
2
Linkage between research sponsorship and patented eye-care technology.研究赞助与专利眼科护理技术之间的联系。
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996 Nov;37(12):2495-503.
3
Quantitative Analysis of Technological Innovation in Urology.泌尿外科技术创新的定量分析
Urology. 2018 Jan;111:230-237. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.07.068. Epub 2017 Oct 9.
4
Patenting and the gender gap: should women be encouraged to patent more?专利与性别差距:是否应该鼓励女性申请更多专利?
Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Jun;19(2):491-504. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9344-5. Epub 2012 Jan 3.
5
Enabling policy planning and innovation management through patent information and co-authorship network analyses: a study of tuberculosis in Brazil.通过专利信息和合著网络分析促进政策规划和创新管理:巴西结核病研究。
PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e45569. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045569. Epub 2012 Oct 3.
6
Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time.随着时间的推移,论文和专利的颠覆性越来越小。
Nature. 2023 Jan;613(7942):138-144. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x. Epub 2023 Jan 4.
7
Ability differences among people who have commensurate degrees matter for scientific creativity.拥有同等学位的人之间的能力差异对科学创造力很重要。
Psychol Sci. 2008 Oct;19(10):957-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02182.x.
8
Inventions and patents: a practical tutorial.发明与专利:实用教程。
Methods Mol Biol. 2012;823:391-408. doi: 10.1007/978-1-60327-216-2_26.
9
Patenting inventions arising from biological research.对生物研究中产生的发明授予专利。
Genome Biol. 2005;6(1):203. doi: 10.1186/gb-2004-6-1-203. Epub 2004 Dec 20.
10
Inventions and Patents: A Practical Tutorial.发明与专利:实用教程
Methods Mol Biol. 2017;1606:379-397. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6990-6_25.

引用本文的文献

1
Probiotics as technological innovations in psychiatric disorders: patents and research reviews.益生菌作为精神疾病的技术创新:专利与研究综述
Front Nutr. 2025 Apr 24;12:1567097. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1567097. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of researchers' impact indices.研究者影响力指数比较。
PLoS One. 2020 May 29;15(5):e0233765. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233765. eCollection 2020.
2
Scientific elite revisited: patterns of productivity, collaboration, authorship and impact.再探科学精英:生产力、合作、署名及影响力模式
J R Soc Interface. 2020 Apr;17(165):20200135. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2020.0135. Epub 2020 Apr 22.
3
Examining the Correlation Between Altmetric Score and Citations in the General Surgery Literature.探讨普通外科文献中替代计量指标得分与引用之间的相关性。
J Surg Res. 2020 Apr;248:159-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.11.008. Epub 2020 Jan 2.
4
The increasing importance of fellowships and career development awards in the careers of early-stage biomedical academic researchers. fellowship 和职业发展奖在早期生物医学学术研究人员职业发展中的重要性日益增加。
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 17;14(10):e0223876. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223876. eCollection 2019.
5
Longitudinal relationship between social media activity and article citations in the journal Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.社交媒体活动与《胃肠内镜学》杂志文章引用之间的纵向关系。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jul;90(1):77-83. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.03.028. Epub 2019 Mar 29.
6
Social impact in social media: A new method to evaluate the social impact of research.社交媒体中的社会影响力:一种评估研究社会影响力的新方法。
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 29;13(8):e0203117. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203117. eCollection 2018.
7
Researcher and Author Impact Metrics: Variety, Value, and Context.研究人员和作者影响力指标:多样性、价值和背景。
J Korean Med Sci. 2018 Apr 18;33(18):e139. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e139. eCollection 2018 Apr 30.
8
Do Nobel Laureates Create Prize-Winning Networks? An Analysis of Collaborative Research in Physiology or Medicine.诺贝尔奖得主会创造出获奖网络吗?对生理学或医学领域合作研究的分析。
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 31;10(7):e0134164. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134164. eCollection 2015.
9
The validation of peer review through research impact measures and the implications for funding strategies.通过研究影响指标验证同行评议及其对资助策略的影响。
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 3;9(9):e106474. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106474. eCollection 2014.
10
Scientific activity is a better predictor of nobel award chances than dietary habits and economic factors.与饮食习惯和经济因素相比,科研活动是诺贝尔奖获奖几率的更好预测指标。
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 27;9(3):e92612. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092612. eCollection 2014.