When evaluating quality and impact of publications of a country, the most commonly used metrics are the number and impact of publications along with expert evaluations in discipline specific evaluation.
Interpreting bibliometric indicators on a macro level is not easy when evaluating whole countries, and therefore this requires particular caution and critical thinking. Country specific assessments are usually based on several indicators, but the results often contradict each other. When comparing different countries, the rankings can vary vastly according to which indicator is being examined. This does open up the possibility of choosing the most 'convenient' indicator for some specific purpose.
Even the most simple of indicators such as how many publications a country has produced can be calculated in so many different ways. There are at least three ways to calculate the collaborative publications researchers have produced across national borders. The publications can be attributed to the collaborating countries according to how many researchers from each country have taken part in the research, or they can be simply added on as one publication for each country. The third way is to only add a publication on to the country that the first author in the list represents.
It is challenging to noticeresearch trends in country specific assessments than with comparisons between countries, and thus comparing countries is more informative.
Academy of Finland
Ministry of Culture and Education
Country specific science reports
Clarivate Web of Science Essential Science Indicators: Top papers by countries ym.
University rankings (also rankings by country)