scholarly journals Global research trends in hyperuricemia: A bibliometric and visualised study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qingxi Zhang ◽  
Hui Li ◽  
Dan Xing ◽  
Jianhao Lin
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Research Output ◽  
H Index ◽  
Genome Wide ◽  
Global Trend ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Science Citation Index Expanded ◽  
Global Research

ABSTRACT Objectives The global trend of research on hyperuricaemia (HUA) has not been well studied. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the trend of research on HUA and compare the findings in publications from different countries, institutions, journals, and authors, to predict the research hotspots. Methods Publications related to HUA were searched using the Science Citation Index-Expanded Web of Science. The data were analysed by using the bibliometric methodology. Additionally, a graphical mapping was generated by using the VOS viewer software to carry out a co-occurrence analysis and to investigate the trend of publications in this field. Results A total of 6313 articles were included. The number of publications was increasing globally yearly. USA was the leading country in global research in this field, with the largest number of publications and citations as well as the highest H-index (H-index reflects both the number of publications and the number of citations per publication). PLOS One published the largest number of publications related to HUA. JOHNSON RJ T has published the largest number of papers in this field. Published studies could be classified into six clusters: ‘Pathophysiology’, ‘HUA and metabolic syndrome’, ‘HUA and cardiovascular disease’, ‘HUA and gout’, ‘HUA and nephropathy’, and ‘Genome-wide research’. ‘Pathophysiology’, ‘HUA and cardiovascular disease’, ‘HUA and gout’, and ‘Genome-wide research’ were predicted as the next hot topics in HUA research. Conclusions USA was the leading country in global research in this field. It is expected that an increasing research output will continue to be observed in the near future. ‘Pathophysiology’, ‘HUA and cardiovascular disease’, ‘HUA and gout’, and ‘Genome-wide research’ may be the next hotspots and hence need more attention in the future.

scholarly journals The Association Between Professional Accounts on Social Networks Twitter and ResearchGate and the Number of Scientific Publications and Citations Among Anesthesia Researchers: Observational Study (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Clavier ◽  
Emilie Occhiali ◽  
Zoé Demailly ◽  
Vincent Compère ◽  
Benoit Veber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Networks ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
H Index ◽  
The Social ◽  
Twitter Account ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Science Citation Index Expanded

BACKGROUND Social networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers. METHODS We included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index. RESULTS A total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; <i>P</i>=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; <i>P</i>=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; <i>P</i>=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; <i>P</i>=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; <i>P</i>=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). CONCLUSIONS Among French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.

Mapping Research in Joint Preserving Procedures of Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: A Bibliometric Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qing Xi Zhang ◽  
Yu Zhao ◽  
Hui LI ◽  
Dan Xing ◽  
Jianhao Lin
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
H Index ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
Publication Number ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Science Citation Index Expanded ◽  
Global Research

Abstract Background: There have been increased interests in the joint preserving procedures of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). This study aims to present a bibliometric analysis of the publications of this field during this period (1999–2019).Method: Publications related to joint preserving procedures of ONFH were searched from the Science Citation Index-Expanded Web of Science. The data were analyzed by using bibliometric methodology. Additionally, the work made a graphical mapping by using the VOS viewer software. This was used for bibliographic coupling, co-authorship, co-citation, co-occurrence analysis and to investigate the publication trends in this field.Results: A total of 3467 articles were included. The number of publications were increasing globally every year. China made the most publications. But the USA made the highest contributions to the global research with the most citations and the highest H-index. CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH had the highest publication number. Studies could be classified into four clusters: process and clinical treatment, risk factors and diagnosis, pathophysiology, and basic research. Pathophysiology and basic research were predicted as the next hot topics in joint preserving procedures of ONFH.Conclusion: Base on the current global trends, it has been growing in a number of publications of joint preserving procedures of ONFH since 1999. The USA was the leading country in global research in this field. Pathophysiology and basic research may be the next hot spots, which need more attention in the future.

Bibliometric Analysis of Current Drug Metabolism: The Twentieth Anniversary from 2000-2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 685-703
Author(s):  
Waseem Hassan ◽  
Jean Paul Kamdem ◽  
Mohammad Amjad Kamal ◽  
Joao Batista Teixeira da Rocha
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Drug Metabolism ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Continuous Growth ◽  
H Index ◽  
Current Drug ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Twentieth Anniversary ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Number Of Citations

Background: Scopus is regularly covering Current Drug Metabolism from 2000 onwards. Objective: The major objective is to perform the 1st bibliometric analysis of Current Drug Metabolism (CDM). Methods: The data was retrieved from Scopus in April-May 2020 for detail analysis. Results: The total number of publications was found to be 1551, with 955 reviews (61.57%) and 466 articles (30.05%). From 2000 onwards, we calculated the relative growth rate and doubling time. Based on the number of publications, total 4418 authors, 3235 institutions and 83 countries were directly involved in all publications. M.A. Kamal is the highly productive scientist with fifty-three (53 or 3.73%) publications, King Abdulaziz University is the top university with the highest number of publications (58 or 4.13%) and the USA is the top-ranked country with 365 publications (25.96%). We also provided the h-index, total citations (TC), h-index without self-citations (WSC) and total WSC of the top ten authors, universities and countries. In citations analysis, Prof. Zhou S.F. was the top scientist with the highest (1594) number of citations. In institutional category Department of Drug Metabolism, Merck Research Laboratories, Rahway, United States, is the top ranked institutes with 654 total citations. While, United States is the top-ranked country with 18409 total citations. In co-words analysis, 3387, 30564 and 17333 terms in titles of the manuscripts, abstracts and keywords were recorded, respectively. This indicated that CDM principally focused on understanding drug development ranging from its efficacy to delivery, metabolism, distribution, safety and mechanism of actions. Similarly, various specific drugs were thoroughly discussed in publications. Various enzymatic, genetics, proteins and cancer-related aspects were also described. For data presentations, we used VOSviewer graphical maps. Conclusion: The data confirm that CDM showed continuous growth in the number of publications and citations. However significant measures are needed to make overall progress and improve the rankings in relevant categories.

Tracing the Global Trend on the Study of Digital Literacy

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Manash Esh ◽  
Saptarshi Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Digital Divide ◽  
Digital Literacy ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Internet Research ◽  
Prolific Author ◽  
Relative Growth ◽  
Internet Skills ◽  
Global Trend ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Number Of Citations

Using the SCOPUS database, this paper aims to quantify global research output on digital literacy (DL) from 2011 to 2020. In addition, there were 7388 documents and 42504 citations. The average number of citations received per publication was 5.63. The result of the study `depicts that the growth of publication on digital literacy has an incremental trend, and year-wise citation is also found to increase from 64 to 13163 during the study period. Furthermore, the research found that Relative Growth Rate (RGR) and Doubling Time (DT) had a fluctuating pattern throughout the study. "Internet skills and the digital divide" were learned to be the leading article among the most important source titles used for the publication of DL studies, with 368 citations. However, the "Journal of Medical Internet Research" received the highest mean citation per document (24.26), and G. Merchant was identified as the most prolific author with a mean citation per document of 24.38.

Scientometric Analysis of the Research Output of Physics and Astronomy of Guru Nanak Dev University during 2006-15

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 337
Author(s):  
Sunaina Khanna ◽  
Neeraj Kumar Singh ◽  
Deepika Tewari ◽  
Harinder Singh Saini
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
H Index ◽  
Average Citation ◽  
Publication Number ◽  
International Collaborations ◽  
The University ◽  
Number Of Citations

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The study attempts to analyse research contributions of the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar in physics and astronomy during the period 2006-15. The data for this study was extracted from Scopus. The study analyses the </span><span>year-wise research productivity, national and international collaborations, top collaborating institutions, most prolific </span><span>authors, journals used for communication, most preferred journals for publication, number of citations received by the University during the period under study. This paper analyses that the university has published 652 papers in physics and astronomy. The University had registered the average citation impact per paper of 7.01 per cent and 6 publications received 51 to 100 citations. Among the Indian universities, University stood at 23</span><span>rd </span><span>rank in term of publications output (652) and h-index (29), 16</span><span>th </span><span>rank in average citation per paper (7.01 per cent) and 18</span><span>th </span><span>rank in share of high cited papers (1 per cent) and 19</span><span>th </span><span>rank in terms of international collaborative papers (27.45 per cent) during 2006-15. Around 68.71 per cent publications of the University in physics and astronomy were in national collaboration between GNDU and several other Indian organisations. The study clearly indicates that journals are the most preferred form of publication to communicate research works by the researchers. </span></p></div></div></div>

scholarly journals Assessment of the NIH-supported relative citation ratio as a measure of research productivity among 1687 academic neurological surgeons

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Vamsi Reddy ◽  
Arjun Gupta ◽  
Michael D. White ◽  
Raghav Gupta ◽  
Prateek Agarwal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
H Index ◽  
Relative Citation ◽  
Retrospective Data Analysis ◽  
Author Productivity ◽  
Doctor Of Philosophy ◽  
Male Sex ◽  
Number Of Citations

OBJECTIVEPublication metrics such as the Hirsch index (h-index) are often used to evaluate and compare research productivity in academia. The h-index is not a field-normalized statistic and can therefore be dependent on overall rates of publication and citation within specific fields. Thus, a metric that adjusts for this while measuring individual contributions would be preferable. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has developed a new, field-normalized, article-level metric called the “relative citation ratio” (RCR) that can be used to more accurately compare author productivity between fields. The mean RCR is calculated as the total number of citations per year of a publication divided by the average field-specific citations per year, whereas the weighted RCR is the sum of all article-level RCR scores over an author’s career. The present study was performed to determine how various factors, such as academic rank, career duration, a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree, and sex, impact the RCR to analyze research productivity among academic neurosurgeons.METHODSA retrospective data analysis was performed using the iCite database. All physician faculty affiliated with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited neurological surgery programs were eligible for analysis. Sex, career duration, academic rank, additional degrees, total publications, mean RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each individual. Mean RCR and weighted RCR were compared between variables to assess patterns of analysis by using SAS software version 9.4.RESULTSA total of 1687 neurosurgery faculty members from 125 institutions were included in the analysis. Advanced academic rank, longer career duration, and PhD acquisition were all associated with increased mean and weighted RCRs. Male sex was associated with having an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR score. Overall, neurological surgeons were highly productive, with a median RCR of 1.37 (IQR 0.93–1.97) and a median weighted RCR of 28.56 (IQR 7.99–85.65).CONCLUSIONSThe RCR and its derivatives are new metrics that help fill in the gaps of other indices for research output. Here, the authors found that advanced academic rank, longer career duration, and PhD acquisition were all associated with increased mean and weighted RCRs. Male sex was associated with having an increased weighted, but not mean, RCR score, most likely because of historically unequal opportunities for women within the field. Furthermore, the data showed that current academic neurosurgeons are exceptionally productive compared to both physicians in other specialties and the general scientific community.

scholarly journals fCite: a fractional citation tool to quantify an individual’s scientific research output

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukasz Pawel Kozlowski
Keyword(s):  
Research Output ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
User Profiles ◽  
H Index ◽  
Scientific Research Output ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Multiple Metrics ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Number Of Authors

ABSTRACTHere, I present the fCite web service (fcite.org) a tool for the in-depth analysis of an individual’s scientific research output. While multiple existing tools (e.g., Google Scholar, iCite, Microsoft Academic) focus on the total number of citations and the H-index, I propose the analysis of the research output by considering multiple metrics to provide greater insight into a scientist’s multifaceted profile. The most distinguishing feature of fCite is its ability to calculate fractional scores for most of the metrics currently in use. Thanks to the division of citations (and RCR scores) by the number of authors, the tool provides a more detailed analysis of a scholar’s portfolio. fCite is based on PUBMED data (~18 million publications), and the statistics are calculated with respect to ORCID data (~600,000 user profiles).

scholarly journals Game of Tenure: the role of “hidden” citations on researchers’ ranking in Ecology

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Benítez-López ◽  
Luca Santini
Keyword(s):  
Original Data ◽  
Publication Rate ◽  
Ecological Data ◽  
H Index ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Model Parameterization ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Number Of Citations

AimField ecologists and macroecologists often compete for the same grants and academic positions, with the former producing original data that the latter generally use for model parameterization. Original data are usually cited only in the supplementary materials thereby not counting formally as citations, creating an unfair system where field ecologists are routinely under-acknowledged and possibly disadvantaged in the race for funding and positions. Here we explore how the performance of authors contributing ecological data would change if all the citations to their work would be accounted for by bibliometric indicators.LocationWorldwideTime period2008-2017Major taxa studiedHomo sapiens academiaeMethods We collected the track record of &gt;2300 authors from Google Scholar and citation data from 600 papers published in 40 ecology journals, including field-based, conservation, general ecology and macroecology studies. Then we parameterize a simulation that mimics the current publishing system for ecologists and assessed author rankings based on number of citations, H-Index, Impact Factor and number of publications under a scenario where supplementary citations count.Results We found weak evidence for field ecologists being lower ranked than macroecologists or general ecologists, with publication rate being the main predictor of author performance. Accounting for supplementary citations in bibliometrics did not substantially change the current ranking dynamics.Main conclusionsCurrent ranking dynamics are largely unaffected by supplementary citations as they are 10 times less than the number of main text citations. This is exacerbated by the common practice of citing datasets assembled by previous papers instead than the original articles. Nonetheless, researcher performance evaluations should include criteria that better capture authors’ contribution of new, publicly available, data. This could encourage field ecologists to collect and store new data in a systematic manner, thereby mitigating the data patchiness and bias in macroecology studies, and further accelerating the advancement of Ecology.

scholarly journals Research Output of University of Jaffna, Sri Lanka during 2000 2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10
Author(s):  
Thivya Janen
Keyword(s):  
Growth Rate ◽  
Sri Lanka ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Prolific Authors ◽  
Number Of Citations

Universities play a vital role in the research and development of a country. A scientometric analysis is an essential tool used by the administrators, funding agencies, government, and researchers to know the publication trend on a topic, institution, author, journal, etc. This study analyses pattern of articles published by the University of Jaffna (UoJ) during 2000-2019; identifies publication growth rate, most prolific authors and their citation impact, communication pattern in terms of type of documents, journal publishing country and impact factor of these journals and also the international collaboration. Analysis of the data indicates, there are 293 articles were published in WOS indexed journals. The publication growth rate indicates that there is a consistent growth in the number of publications after 2014. It was found that multi-authorship dominates among UoJ researchers. A high number of publications were on Multidisciplinary Sciences. The UoJ collaborated with different countries; among them 59 articles were published with United Kingdom. Among the highly cited top 10 publications, an article authored by Ravirajan P received a high number of citations of 480. Among the funding agencies National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka funded for 24 publications, while UoJ funded for 16 and among the international funding agencies UK Research Innovation (UKRI) funded for 7 publications during the study period.

Comparative analysis of domestic psychologists and ergonomists’ publication activity using citation indices

Ergodesign ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-249
Author(s):  
Valeriy Spasennikov
Keyword(s):  
Hirsch Index ◽  
H Index ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Relevant Field ◽  
Scientific Results ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
American Physicist ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Relevance Index ◽  
Official Recognition

The advantages and disadvantages of indices for assessing scientists’ activities using the scientometric databases Web of Science (USA), Scopus (EU) and RSCI (RF) are considered. It is proposed to use such indicators as the citation index and the publication relevance index to objectify the data in addition to the known indicators, namely the number of publications, the number of links, the average number of citations per publication, the Hirsch index. It is shown that the main disadvantage of the h-index proposed by the American physicist Jorge Hirsch for assessing ergonomists’ scientific activities is not taking into account the relevance of breakthrough scientific results and inventions. The rating of 25 leading domestic psychologists and 25 domestic ergonomists is given, which is obtained from the RSCI database and it includes such indicators as the number of publications, the total number of citations, the average number of citations, the average number of citations per publication, and the Hirsch index. It is concluded that using relevance and citation indices is, to a certain extent, evidence of this scholar’ official recognition by the scientific community and the formal confirmation of his authority. It is shown that applying scientometric citation indices and their correct use in assessing scientists’ activities should be carried out by the qualified experts in the relevant field of knowledge.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document