Dataset Information

Developing a novel algorithm for comparing cluster patterns in networks on journal articles during and after COVID-19: Bibliometric analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cluster analysis is vital in bibliometrics for deciphering large sets of academic data. However, no prior research has employed a cluster-pattern algorithm to assess the similarities and differences between 2 clusters in networks. The study goals are 2-fold: to create a cluster-pattern comparison algorithm tailored for bibliometric analysis and to apply this algorithm in presenting clusters of countries, institutes, departments, authors (CIDA), and keywords on journal articles during and after COVID-19.

Methods

We analyzed 9499 and 5943 articles from the Journal of Medicine (Baltimore) during and after COVID-19 in 2020 to 2021 and 2022 to 2023, sourced from the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection. Follower-leading clustering algorithm (FLCA) was compared to other 8 counterparts in cluster validation and effectiveness and a cluster-pattern-comparison algorithm (CPCA) was developed using the similarity coefficient, collaborative maps, and thematic maps to evaluate CIDA cluster patterns. The similarity coefficients were categorized as identical, similar, dissimilar, or different for values above 0.7, between 0.5 and 0.7, between 0.3 and 0.5, and below 0.3, respectively.

Results

Both stages displayed similar trends in annual publications and average citations, although these trends are decreasing. The peak publication year was 2020. Similarity coefficients of cluster patterns in these 2 stages for CIDA entities and keywords were 0.73, 0.35, 0.80, 0.02, and 0.83, respectively, suggesting the existence of identical patterns (>0.70) in countries, departments, and keywords plus, but dissimilar (<0.5) and different patterns (<0.3) found in institutes and 1st and corresponding authors, during and after COVID-19.

Conclusions

This research effectively created and utilized CPCA to analyze cluster patterns in bibliometrics. It underscores notable identical patterns in country-/department-/keyword based clusters, but dissimilar and different in institute-/author- based clusters, between these 2 stages during and after COVID-19, offering a framework for future bibliographic studies to compare cluster patterns beyond just the CIDA entities, as demonstrated in this study.

SUBMITTER: Wu AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10956958 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing a novel algorithm for comparing cluster patterns in networks on journal articles during and after COVID-19: Bibliometric analysis.

Wu Alice-Like AL Chow Julie Chi JC

Medicine 20240301 12

<h4>Background</h4>Cluster analysis is vital in bibliometrics for deciphering large sets of academic data. However, no prior research has employed a cluster-pattern algorithm to assess the similarities and differences between 2 clusters in networks. The study goals are 2-fold: to create a cluster-pattern comparison algorithm tailored for bibliometric analysis and to apply this algorithm in presenting clusters of countries, institutes, departments, authors (CIDA), and keywords on journal articles ...[more]

PMID: 38518002

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceCitation analysis is a bibliometric method that uses citation rates to evaluate research performance. This type of analysis can identify the articles that have shaped the modern history of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN).ObjectivesTo identify and characterize top-cited OBGYN articles in the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science's Science Citation Index Expanded and to compare top-cited OBGYN articles published in specialty OBGYN journals with those published in nonspecialty journals.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional bibliometric analysis of top-cited articles that were indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded from 1980 to 2018. The Science Citation Index Expanded was queried using search terms from the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology's 2018 certifying examination topics list. The top 100 articles from all journals and the top 100 articles from OBGYN journals were evaluated for specific characteristics. Data were analyzed in March 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe articles were characterized by citation number, publication year, topic, study design, and authorship. After excluding articles that featured on both lists, top-cited articles were compared.ResultsThe query identified 3 767 874 articles, of which 278 846 (7.4%) were published in OBGYN journals. The top-cited article was published by Rossouw and colleagues in JAMA (2002). Top-cited articles published in nonspecialty journals were more frequently cited than those in OBGYN journals (median [interquartile range], 1738 [1490-2077] citations vs 666 [580-843] citations, respectively; P < .001) and were more likely to be randomized trials (25.0% vs 2.2%, respectively; difference, 22.8%; 95% CI, 13.5%-32.2%; P < .001). Whereas articles from nonspecialty journals focused on broad topics like osteoporosis, articles from OBGYN journal focused on topics like preeclampsia and endometriosis.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found substantial differences between top-cited OBGYN articles published in nonspecialty vs OBGYN journals. These differences may reflect the different goals of the journals, which work together to ensure optimal dissemination of impactful articles.

Project description:PurposeResearch on the effects of acupuncture on autonomic function has been conducted for several decades, and a few notable studies have emerged in recent years. This study used bibliometric analysis to assess 100 top-cited articles to characterize the current status and research trends over the last three decades.MethodsThe 100 top-cited publications were identified from the Web of Science Core Collection database. The bibliometrix package in R was used for quantitative and qualitative analyses of the publication patterns and the country/region, institution, and author contributions. VOSviewer was used to construct networks based on co-citation analysis of the journals and the keyword co-occurrence.ResultsThe 100 top-cited articles were identified with a total of 8,123 citations (range: 37-345). The majority of the articles came from the USA (n = 42), followed by Japan (n = 14) and mainland China (n = 13). Articles from the USA exhibited the largest number of citations (3,582 citations), followed by articles from Japan (1,189 citations), then articles from mainland China (755 citations). Neurosciences/Neurology was the most studied research area (n = 41). The Autonomic Neuroscience: Basic and Clinical published the largest number of papers (n = 14), while Brain Research received the largest number of citations (205 citations). Longhurst JC was the most productive author (10 publications), and Sato A was first among the cited authors (87 citations). The most frequently cited articles that focused on gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, or gynecologic responses to acupuncture regulation of the autonomic nervous system first appeared in the 1990s, peaked in the 2000s, then decreased after 2010. Publication of articles focused on the anti-inflammatory effects of acupuncture associated with autonomic function demonstrated an increasing trend over the last three decades.ConclusionFrom the initial studies focusing on the autonomic mechanism of visceral responses to acupuncture, researchers concentrated on exploring the autonomic mechanism of acupuncture in the control of systemic inflammation. Non-invasive electrical methods that activate somato-autonomic reflexes are current translational directions in clinical practice. Additional investigation of the underlying neuroanatomical basis of somato-autonomic reflexes also is needed.

Project description:Analyses of author collaborations and keyword co-occurrences are frequently used in bibliographic research. However, no studies have introduced a straightforward yet effective approach, such as utilizing ChatGPT with Code Interpreter (ChatGPT_CI) or the R language, for creating cluster-oriented networks. This research aims to compare cluster analysis methods in ChatGPT_CI and R, visualize country-specific author collaborations, and then demonstrate the most effective approach. The research focused on articles and review pieces from Medicine (Baltimore) published in 2023. By August 20, 2023, we had gathered metadata for 1976 articles using the Web of Science core collections. The efficiency and effectiveness of cluster displays between ChatGPT_CI and R were compared by evaluating their time consumption. The best method was then employed to present a series of visualizations of country-specific author collaborations, rooted in social network and cluster analyses. Visualization techniques incorporating network charts, chord diagrams, circle bar plots, circle packing plots, heat dendrograms, dendrograms, and word clouds were demonstrated. We further highlighted the research profiles of 2 prolific authors using timeline visuals. The research findings include that (1) the most active contributors were China, Nanjing Medical University (China), the Medical School Department, and Dr Chou from Taiwan when considering countries, institutions, departments, and individual authors, respectively; (2) the highest cited articles originated from Medicine (Baltimore) accounting for 4.53%: New England Journal of Medicine, PLOS ONE, LANCET, and The Journal of the American Medical Association, with respective contributions of 3.25%, 2.7%, 2.52%, and 1.54%; (3) visual cluster analysis in R proved to be more efficient and effective than ChatGPT_CI, reducing the time taken from 1 hour to just 3 minutes; (4) 7 cluster-focused networks were crafted using R on a custom platform; and (5) the research trajectories of 2 prominent authors (Dr Brin from the United States and Dr Chow from Taiwan) and articles themes in Medicine 2023 were depicted using timeline visuals. This research highlighted the efficient and effective methods for conducting cluster analyses of author collaborations using R. For future related studies, such as keyword co-occurrence analysis, R is recommended as a viable alternative for bibliographic research.

Project description:BackgroundPreprints are increasingly used to disseminate research results, providing multiple sources of information for the same study. We assessed the consistency in effect estimates between preprint and subsequent journal article of COVID-19 randomized controlled trials.MethodsThe study utilized data from the COVID-NMA living systematic review of pharmacological treatments for COVID-19 (covid-nma.com) up to July 20, 2022. We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating pharmacological treatments vs. standard of care/placebo for patients with COVID-19 that were originally posted as preprints and subsequently published as journal articles. Trials that did not report the same analysis in both documents were excluded. Data were extracted independently by pairs of researchers with consensus to resolve disagreements. Effect estimates extracted from the first preprint were compared to effect estimates from the journal article.ResultsThe search identified 135 RCTs originally posted as a preprint and subsequently published as a journal article. We excluded 26 RCTs that did not meet the eligibility criteria, of which 13 RCTs reported an interim analysis in the preprint and a final analysis in the journal article. Overall, 109 preprint-article RCTs were included in the analysis. The median (interquartile range) delay between preprint and journal article was 121 (73-187) days, the median sample size was 150 (71-464) participants, 76% of RCTs had been prospectively registered, 60% received industry or mixed funding, 72% were multicentric trials. The overall risk of bias was rated as 'some concern' for 80% of RCTs. We found that 81 preprint-article pairs of RCTs were consistent for all outcomes reported. There were nine RCTs with at least one outcome with a discrepancy in the number of participants with outcome events or the number of participants analyzed, which yielded a minor change in the estimate of the effect. Furthermore, six RCTs had at least one outcome missing in the journal article and 14 RCTs had at least one outcome added in the journal article compared to the preprint. There was a change in the direction of effect in one RCT. No changes in statistical significance or conclusions were found.ConclusionsEffect estimates were generally consistent between COVID-19 preprints and subsequent journal articles. The main results and interpretation did not change in any trial. Nevertheless, some outcomes were added and deleted in some journal articles.

Dataset Information

Developing a novel algorithm for comparing cluster patterns in networks on journal articles during and after COVID-19: Bibliometric analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Developing a novel algorithm for comparing cluster patterns in networks on journal articles during and after COVID-19: Bibliometric analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets