The catalytic role of a research university and international partnerships in building research capacity in Peru: A bibliometric analysis

Abstract

Objective In Peru, the past three decades have witnessed impressive growth in biomedical research catalyzed from a single research university and its investigators who secured international partnerships and funding. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of publications by Peruvian authors to understand the roots of this growth and the spread of research networks within the country. Methods For 1997–2016, publications from Web of Science with at least one author affiliated with a Peruvian institution were examined by year, author affiliations, funding agencies, co-authorship linkages, and research topics. Results From 1997–2016, the annual number of publications from Peru increased 9-fold from 75 to 672 totaling 6032. Of these, 56% of the articles had co-authors from the US, 13% from the UK, 12% from Brazil, and 10% from Spain. Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH) was clearly the lead research institution noted on one-third of publications. Of the 20 most published authors, 15 were Peruvians, 14 trained at some point at UPCH, and 13 received advanced training abroad. Plotting co-authorships documented the growth of institutional collaborations, the robust links between investigators and some lineages of mentorship. Conclusions This analysis suggests that international training of Peruvian physician-scientists who built and sustained longstanding international partnerships with funding accelerated quality research on diseases of local importance. The role of a single research university, UPCH, was critical to advance a culture of biomedical research. Increased funding from the Peruvian Government and its Council for Science, Technology and Innovation will be needed to sustain this growth in the future. Middle-income countries might consider the Peruvian experience where long-term research and training partnerships yielded impressive advances to address key health priorities of the country.

Tuberculosis Scientific Conferences in Peru: Sharing local evidence for local decisions

“…For instance, UPCH and SES excel yearly supporting the conferences as members of the planning committee and their contribution can also be observed in the presence of their international collaborators; principally the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Imperial College London, and Harvard University [10] . A recent study suggested that sustained, long-standing international partnerships promoted and built research capacity in Peru [13] . The annual number of publications increased 9-fold in a 20-year period characterized by the securement of partnerships and TB was among the main research areas that benefited during the seven-year period [13] .…”

“…A recent study suggested that sustained, long-standing international partnerships promoted and built research capacity in Peru [13] . The annual number of publications increased 9-fold in a 20-year period characterized by the securement of partnerships and TB was among the main research areas that benefited during the seven-year period [13] . The partnerships have greatly served the TB-affected population.…”

Mitigating Global Oral Health Inequalities: Research Training Programs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

“…In Peru, the past three decades have witnessed impressive growth in biomedical research catalyzed from efforts made among local educational institutions and NIH securing international partnerships and funding through research training programs [ 11 ]. As a result, Peruvian physician-scientists have built and sustained longstanding international partnerships with funding accelerating quality research on diseases of local importance.…”

Emerging Decolonialized Research Collaboration: The Max Planck Society and the Leibniz Association in Latin America

“…A decolonial perspective, of research cooperation, however, is contested by bibliometric research of research networks that mostly coincide on highlighting the worldwide benefits of international scientific networks without considering possible the enduring heritage of colonial imbalances. Belter et al (2019) show an exponential number of publications on biomedical research due to the collaboration with researchers from the United States, the United Kingdom, Brazil, and Spain but criticize that research is mostly based on a single private university and the lack of long-term sustainability perspective of governmental funds. Based on citation impact measures, Aldieri et al (2018) argue that European universities improve the quality of their research reflected through collaboration but that Italian and Russian universities have benefited less than Germany, France, and the United Kingdom.…”

“…To what extent does current scientific collaboration act as a form of neocolonial control that is exerted through knowledge production? Most studies on research partnerships (Baud, 2002; Mazzoleni & Nelson, 2007) and contemporary bibliometric analysis of research partnerships (Aldieri et al, 2018; Belter et al, 2019; Eduan & Yuanqun, 2018; Owusu-Nimo & Boshoff, 2017; Payumo et al, 2019; Pohl & Lane, 2018) seem to take for granted the positive outcomes of research collaboration for all parties through identifying social and educational conditions that enable scientific networks. Reflections on potential power relationships inherited from colonial legacies, however, are usually absent in this literature.…”