Impact of a Fulbright award: A bibliometric analysis of persistence

Abstract

Background: While hundreds of Fulbright awards have been given, little is known about the impact of such engagement despite a goal of increased research partnership and collaboration.

Aim: The extent and impact of a Fulbright award was explored by examining referencing of primary collaborative publications.

Setting: Seven databases and two alternative sources from 2013 to 2023 were reviewed.

Methods: Co-citation analysis identified pairs of referenced articles. Subsequently, a bibliometric approach was used to quantitatively and visually capture and analyse publications using data visualisation software.

Results: A search of sources found 773 citations citing the 16 primary works. Following the elimination of duplicates, 273 publications remained. Also examined was the non-scientific downstream noted in social media (n = 66). Based on co-citation analysis, there was a sharp uptick in the utilisation of primary citations (n = 273) compared to a 2019 analysis (n = 42). Journal Impact Factors of citing works had a high of 5.379 from 2.079 in 2019. Primary citations in open access journals demonstrated greater referencing, and the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated utilisation of some works. Citing works focussed on three clusters: compassion fatigue, birth stories and Ubuntu. Most citing works originated from South Africa and the United States of America and consisted of multidisciplinary investigators with interfacility alliance and team science engagement. Nursing or midwifery were the main disciplines of first authors in citing articles (n = 153).

Conclusion: Co-citation analysis and downstream use of publications in social media provided evidence of the impact of a Fulbright award on scholarship with persistence over time.

Contributions: Fulbright awards promote collaborative teamwork between disciplines and is of clear benefit to scientists.