↓ Skip to main content

Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nanoparticle Research, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
Title
Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008
Published in
Journal of Nanoparticle Research, December 2009
DOI 10.1007/s11051-009-9831-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Dang, Yulei Zhang, Li Fan, Hsinchun Chen, Mihail C. Roco

Abstract

Nanotechnology patent applications published during 1991-2008 have been examined using the "title-abstract" keyword search on esp@cenet "worldwide" database. The longitudinal evolution of the number of patent applications, their topics, and their respective patent families have been evaluated for 15 national patent offices covering 98% of the total global activity. The patent offices of the United States (USA), People's Republic of China (PRC), Japan, and South Korea have published the largest number of nanotechnology patent applications, and experienced significant but different growth rates after 2000. In most repositories, the largest numbers of nanotechnology patent applications originated from their own countries/regions, indicating a significant "home advantage." The top applicant institutions are from different sectors in different countries (e.g., from industry in the US and Canada patent offices, and from academe or government agencies at the PRC office). As compared to 2000, the year before the establishment of the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), numerous new invention topics appeared in 2008, in all 15 patent repositories. This is more pronounced in the USA and PRC. Patent families have increased among the 15 patent offices, particularly after 2005. Overlapping patent applications increased from none in 1991 to about 4% in 2000 and to about 27% in 2008. The largest share of equivalent nanotechnology patent applications (1,258) between two repositories was identified between the US and Japan patent offices.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Ecuador 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 102 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 20%
Student > Master 17 16%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 6%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 22 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 10 9%
Chemistry 10 9%
Environmental Science 8 7%
Engineering 8 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 6%
Other 38 35%
Unknown 28 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2011.
All research outputs
#4,253,435
of 25,282,542 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nanoparticle Research
#91
of 981 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,374
of 175,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nanoparticle Research
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,282,542 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 981 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 175,156 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.