Dataset Information

Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews.

ABSTRACT: Systematic scientometric reviews, empowered by computational and visual analytic approaches, offer opportunities to improve the timeliness, accessibility, and reproducibility of studies of the literature of a field of research. On the other hand, effectively and adequately identifying the most representative body of scholarly publications as the basis of subsequent analyses remains a common bottleneck in the current practice. What can we do to reduce the risk of missing something potentially significant? How can we compare different search strategies in terms of the relevance and specificity of topical areas covered? In this study, we introduce a flexible and generic methodology based on a significant extension of the general conceptual framework of citation indexing for delineating the literature of a research field. The method, through cascading citation expansion, provides a practical connection between studies of science from local and global perspectives. We demonstrate an application of the methodology to the research of literature-based discovery (LBD) and compare five datasets constructed based on three use scenarios and corresponding retrieval strategies, namely a query-based lexical search (one dataset), forward expansions starting from a groundbreaking article of LBD (two datasets), and backward expansions starting from a recently published review article by a prominent expert in LBD (two datasets). We particularly discuss the relevance of areas captured by expansion processes with reference to the query-based scientometric visualization. The method used in this study for comparing bibliometric datasets is applicable to comparative studies of search strategies.

SUBMITTER: Chen C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6822756 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews.

Chen Chaomei C Song Min M

PloS one 20191031 10

Systematic scientometric reviews, empowered by computational and visual analytic approaches, offer opportunities to improve the timeliness, accessibility, and reproducibility of studies of the literature of a field of research. On the other hand, effectively and adequately identifying the most representative body of scholarly publications as the basis of subsequent analyses remains a common bottleneck in the current practice. What can we do to reduce the risk of missing something potentially sig ...[more]

PMID: 31671124

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in children globally. In recent decades, advances have been made in understanding the mechanism, diagnosis, treatment and management for childhood asthma, but few studies have explored its knowledge structure and future interests comprehensively. Objective This scientometric study aims to understand the research status and emerging trends of childhood asthma. Methods CiteSpace (version 5.8.R3) was used to demonstrate national and institutional collaborations in childhood asthma, analyze research subjects and journal distribution, review research keywords and their clusters, as well as detect research bursts. Results A total of 14,340 publications related to childhood asthma were extracted from Web of Science (core database) during January 2011 to December 2021. The results showed that academic activities of childhood asthma had increased steadily in the last decade. Most of the research was conducted by developed countries while China, as a developing country, was also actively engaged in this field. In addition to subjects of allergy and immunology, both public health aspects and ecological environmental impacts on the disease were emphasized recently in this research field. Keywords clustering analysis indicated that research on asthma management and atopy was constantly updated and became the two major research focuses recently, as a significant shift in research hotspots from etiology and diagnosis to atopic march and asthma management was identified. Subgroup analysis for childhood asthma management and atopy suggested that caregiver- or physician-based education and interventions were emerging directions for asthma management, and that asthma should be carefully studied in the context of atopy, together with other allergic diseases. Conclusions This study presented a comprehensive and systematic overview of the research status of childhood asthma, provided clues to future research directions, and highlighted two significant research trends of asthma management and atopy in this field.

Project description:Driving behaviors and fitness to drive have been assessed over time using different tools: standardized neuropsychological, on-road and driving simulation testing. Nowadays, the great variability of topics related to driving simulation has elicited a high number of reviews. The present work aims to perform a scientometric analysis on driving simulation reviews and to propose a selective review of reviews focusing on relevant aspects related to validity and fidelity. A scientometric analysis of driving simulation reviews published from 1988 to 2019 was conducted. Bibliographic data from 298 reviews were extracted from Scopus and WoS. Performance analysis was conducted to investigate most prolific Countries, Journals, Institutes and Authors. A cluster analysis on authors' keywords was performed to identify relevant associations between different research topics. Based on the reviews extracted from cluster analysis, a selective review of reviews was conducted to answer questions regarding validity, fidelity and critical issues. United States and Germany are the first two Countries for number of driving simulation reviews. United States is the leading Country with 5 Institutes in the top-ten. Top Authors wrote from 3 to 7 reviews each and belong to Institutes located in North America and Europe. Cluster analysis identified three clusters and eight keywords. The selective review of reviews showed a substantial agreement for supporting validity of driving simulation with respect to neuropsychological and on-road testing, while for fidelity with respect to real-world driving experience a blurred representation emerged. The most relevant critical issues were the a) lack of a common set of standards, b) phenomenon of simulation sickness, c) need for psychometric properties, lack of studies investigating d) predictive validity with respect to collision rates and e) ecological validity. Driving simulation represents a cross-cutting topic in scientific literature on driving, and there are several evidences for considering it as a valid alternative to neuropsychological and on-road testing. Further research efforts could be aimed at establishing a consensus statement for protocols assessing fitness to drive, in order to (a) use standardized systems, (b) compare systematically driving simulators with regard to their validity and fidelity, and (c) employ shared criteria for conducting studies in a given sub-topic.

Project description:BackgroundMany systematic reviews (SRs) have been published about the various treatments for distal radius fractures (DRF). The heterogeneity of SRs results may come from the misuse of SR methods, and literature overviews have demonstrated that SRs should be considered with caution as they may not always be synonymous with high-quality standards. Our objective is to evaluate the quality of published SRs on the treatment of DRF through these tools.MethodsThe methods utilized in this review were previously published in the PROSPERO database. We considered SRs of surgical and nonsurgical interventions for acute DRF in adults. A comprehensive search strategy was performed in the MEDLINE database (inception to May 2017) and we manually searched the grey literature for non-indexed research. Data were independently extracted by two authors. We assessed SR internal validity and reporting using AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes). Scores were calculated as the sum of reported items. We also extracted article characteristics and provided Spearman's correlation measurements.ResultsForty-one articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The mean score for PRISMA was 15.90 (CI 95%, 13.9-17.89) and AMSTAR was 6.48 (CI 95% 5.72-7.23). SRs that considered only RCTs had better AMSTAR [7.56 (2.1) vs. 5.62 (2.3); p = 0.014] and PRISMA scores [18.61 (5.22) vs. 13.93 (6.47), p = 0.027]. The presence of meta-analysis on the SRs altered PRISMA scores [19.17 (4.75) vs. 10.21 (4.51), p = 0.001] and AMSTAR scores [7.68 (1.9) vs. 4.39 (1.66), p = 0.001]. Journal impact factor or declaration of conflict of interest did not change PRISMA and AMSTAR scores. We found substantial inter observer agreement for PRISMA (0.82, 95% CI 0.62-0.94; p = 0.01) and AMSTAR (0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.81; p = 0.01), and moderate correlation between PRISMA and AMSTAR scores (0.83, 95% CI 0.62-0.92; p = 0.01).ConclusionsDRF RCT-only SRs have better PRISMA and AMSTAR scores. These tools have substantial inter-observer agreement and moderate inter-tool correlation. We exposed the current research panorama and pointed out some factors that can contribute to improvements on the topic.

Project description:BackgroundThousands of research articles on neuroblastoma have been published over the past few decades; however, the heterogeneity and variable quality of scholarly data may challenge scientists or clinicians to survey all of the available information. Hence, holistic measurement and analyzation of neuroblastoma-related literature with the help of sophisticated mathematical tools could provide deep insights into global research performance and the collaborative architectonical structure within the neuroblastoma scientific community. In this scientometric study, we aim to determine the extent of the scientific output related to neuroblastoma research between 1980 and 2018.MethodsWe applied novel scientometric tools, including Bibliometrix R package, biblioshiny, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace IV for comprehensive science mapping analysis of extensive bibliographic metadata, which was retrieved from the Web of ScienceTM Core Collection database.ResultsWe demonstrate the enormous proliferation of neuroblastoma research during last the 38?years, including 12,435 documents published in 1828 academic journals by 36,908 authors from 86 different countries. These documents received a total of 316,017 citations with an average citation per document of 28.35?±?7.7. We determine the proportion of highly cited and never cited papers, "occasional" and prolific authors and journals. Further, we show 12 (13.9%) of 86 countries were responsible for 80.4% of neuroblastoma-related research output.ConclusionsThese findings are crucial for researchers, clinicians, journal editors, and others working in neuroblastoma research to understand the strengths and potential gaps in the current literature and to plan future investments in data collection and science policy. This first scientometric study of global neuroblastoma research performance provides valuable insight into the scientific landscape, co-authorship network architecture, international collaboration, and interaction within the neuroblastoma community.

Dataset Information

Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews.

Publications

Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets