Systematic review and bibliometric analysis of African anesthesia and critical care medicine research part I: hierarchy of evidence and scholarly productivity
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kanmounye U
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7523301 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundScientometrics is used to assess the impact of research in several health fields, including Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine. The purpose of this study was to identify contributors to highly-cited African Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine research.MethodsThe authors searched Web of Science from inception to May 4, 2020, for articles on and about Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine in Africa with ?2 citations. Quantitative (H-index) and qualitative (descriptive analysis of yearly publications and interpretation of document, co-authorship, author country, and keyword) bibliometric analyses were done.ResultsThe search strategy returned 116 articles with a median of 5 (IQR: 3-12) citations on Web of Science. Articles were published in Anesthesia and Analgesia (18, 15.5%), World Journal of Surgery (13, 11.2%), and South African Medical Journal (8, 6.9%). Most (74, 63.8%) articles were published on or after 2013. Seven authors had more than 1 article in the top 116 articles: Epiu I (3, 2.6%), Elobu AE (2, 1.7%), Fenton PM (2, 1.7%), Kibwana S (2, 1.7%), Rukewe A (2, 1.7%), Sama HD (2, 1.7%), and Zoumenou E (2, 1.7%). The bibliometric coupling analysis of documents highlighted 10 clusters, with the most significant nodes being Biccard BM, 2018; Baker T, 2013; Llewellyn RL, 2009; Nigussie S, 2014; and Aziato L, 2015. Dubowitz G (5) and Ozgediz D (4) had the highest H-indices among the authors referenced by the most-cited African Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine articles. The U.S.A., England, and Uganda had the strongest collaboration links among the articles, and most articles focused on perioperative care.ConclusionThis study highlighted trends in top-cited African articles and African and non-African academic institutions' contributions to these articles.
| S-EPMC7819185 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough publications have been increasing rapidly, the research quality has yet to improve in the field of critical care medicine (CCM) in China. This study aimed at investigating the current status of and the influential factors for impactful publications in CCM research by Chinese authors.MethodsPublications by authors with the affiliation of critical care medicine department or intensive care unit (CCM/ICU) in Chinese as well as American hospitals from 2001 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database for this bibliometric analysis. Moreover, statistical analyses to test factors affecting impactful publications by Chinese authors were performed.ResultsOf 13,487 articles retrieved by this search strategy, 6,622 were published by Chinese authors as first or corresponding authors. The annual publications by Chinese authors have been rapidly increasing from 2001 to 2020, and so did the citations to these articles. However, the proportion in the world of publications by Chinese authors was much less than that by American authors each year [M (IQR): 1.85 (9.592) vs. 27.77 (7.3), p < 0.001]. In addition, impactful articles were significantly less published by Chinese than by American authors, including articles either in journals with a high impact factor (p < 0.001) or in the top 10 journals in the field of CCM (5.4 vs 13.4%, p < 0.001), and articles with high citation frequency as well (p < 0.001). Moreover, the percentage of impactful publications by Chinese authors was likely associated with academic background and regions of the author's affiliations, funds support, public health events of COVID-19, and collaboration between authors.ConclusionOur results demonstrated that CCM research in China grew rapidly in the recent 20 years. However, the impactful publications remained limited, largely owing to the shortage of comprehensive research training, inactive collaboration, and underfunded CCM research.
| S-EPMC9622943 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scholarly concentration programs have become a common method to promote student inquiry and independent research in medical schools. Given the high resource requirements of scholarly concentration program implementation, it is important to examine program efficacy. This systematic review examined the impact of scholarly concentration programs on student research productivity.The authors carried out a literature search to find articles related to scholarly concentration program research productivity outcomes. The inclusion criterion was a method of rigorously evaluating program scholarly productivity. Study rigour was evaluated with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument.The initial search disclosed 2467 unique records: 78 were considered based on titles and abstracts; eight were considered by scanning references. Eleven papers met the inclusion criteria: all were descriptive; none had a priori hypotheses that examined predictors of medical student research productivity in scholarly concentration programs or prospectively evaluated program impact on student scholarly output.While few in number and often lacking in rigour, the studies included herein suggest that adequate administrative support, strong mentorship and tailored program characteristics are essential in facilitating student research productivity in scholarly concentration programs. Given the challenges inherent in medical education research, a conceptual framework based on United Way's approach may help program planners and educators address this gap in the evaluation of scholarly concentration programs.
| S-EPMC5542888 | biostudies-other
Project description:Scientometrics enables scholars to assess and visualize emerging research trends and hot-spots in the scientific literature from a quantitative standpoint. In the last decades, Africa has nearly doubled its absolute count of scholarly output, even though its share in global knowledge production has dramatically decreased. The still-ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted the way scholarly research is conducted, published, and disseminated. However, the COVID-19-related research focus, the scientific productivity, and the research collaborative network of African researchers during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic remain to be elucidated. This study aimed to clarify the COVID-19 research patterns among African researchers and estimate the strength of collaborations and partnerships between African researchers and scholars from the rest of the world during the COVID-19 pandemic, collecting data from electronic scholarly databases such as Web of Science (WoS), PubMed/MEDLINE and African Journals OnLine (AJOL), the largest and prominent platform of African-published scholarly journals. We found that COVID-19-related collaboration patterns varied among African regions. For instance, most of the scholarly partnerships occurred with formerly colonial countries (such as European or North-American countries). In other cases, scholarly ties of North African countries were above all with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In terms of number of publications, South Africa and Egypt were among the most productive countries. Bibliometrics and, in particular, scientometrics can help scholars identify research areas of particular interest, as well as emerging topics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. With a specific focus on the still-ongoing viral outbreak, they can assist decision- and policy-makers in allocating funding and economic-financial, logistic, organizational, and human resources, based on the specific gaps and needs of a given country or research area.
| S-EPMC8308093 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), one of the most serious public health crises in over a century, has led to an unprecedented surge of publications across all areas of knowledge. This study assessed the early research productivity on COVID-19 in terms of vaccination, diagnosis, treatment, symptoms, risk factors, nutrition, and economy. The Scopus database was searched between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 to initially examine the research productivity on COVID-19, as measured by total publications by the 20 highest-ranked countries according to gross domestic product. The literature search was then refined, and research productivity was assessed across seven major research domains related to COVID-19: vaccination, diagnosis, treatment, symptoms, risk factors, nutrition, and economy. The initial literature search yielded 53,348 publications. Among these, 27,801 publications involved authorship from a single country and 22,119 publications involved authorship from multiple countries. Overall, the United States was the most productive country (n = 13,491), with one and a half times or more publications than any other country, on COVID-19 and the selected domains related to it. However, following adjustment for population size, gross domestic product, and expenditure for research and development, countries of emerging economies such as India along countries of lower population density such as Switzerland, Indonesia, and Turkey exhibited higher research productivity. The surge of COVID-19 publications in such a short period of time underlines the capacity of the scientific community to respond against a global health emergency; however where future research priorities and resource distribution should be placed on the respective thematic fields at an international level, warrants further investigation.
| S-EPMC9197383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Many fellows in clinically driven subspecialties may have difficulty completing and publishing their scholarly projects due to lack of prior experience in research, selection of projects that are difficult to complete during fellowship, or mentorship challenges. This may be particularly true in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) because research time may be longitudinally integrated with clinical rotations, rather than blocked as is common in other subspecialties. We describe the creation and outcomes of a structured program to increase academic productivity of PEM fellows. Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study of scholarly productivity (publications in peer-reviewed journals, presentation at national meetings) for PEM fellows over 17 years in one fellowship program, before and after the implementation of a structured program. We reviewed obstacles to publication for prior fellow projects when developing the curriculum. Our multifaceted program consisted of milestone development, four in-person committee meetings, and abstract and manuscript development workshops. We utilized existing faculty members, most of whom were junior faculty, as committee members. Our primary outcome was the percentage of fellows who were first authors for peer-reviewed publications for their fellowship projects. National conference presentations were the secondary outcome. Results:Data for 76 PEM fellows were eligible for analysis: 44 (58%) before and 32 after programmatic implementation. There was a statistically significant increase in the percentage of fellows who published their studies (32% vs. 63%; odds ratio [OR] = 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4 to 9.3) after programmatic implementation. There were no differences in conference presentations (45% vs. 63%; OR = 2.0, 95% CI = 0.8-5.1) after implementation. Conclusions:Utilizing a small group of existing, predominantly junior faculty members, we created a structured program that enhanced PEM fellows' scholarly productivity and increased publications. We believe that this model is sustainable for and generalizable to other PEM fellowship programs.
| S-EPMC7369492 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy is a phenomenon where individuals delay or refuse to take some or all vaccines. The objective of this study was to conduct a global bibliometric analysis of research productivity and identify country level indicators that could be associated with publications on vaccine hesitancy. We searched PubMed and Web of Science for publications from 1974 to 2019, and selected articles focused on behavioral and social aspects of vaccination. Data on country-level indicators were obtained from the World Bank. We used Spearman's correlation and zero-inflated negative-binomial regression models to ascertain the association between country level indicators and the number of publications. We identified 4314 articles, with 1099 eligible for inclusion. The United States of America (461 publications, 41.9%), Canada (84 publications, 7.6%) and the United Kingdom (68 publications, 6.2%) had the highest number of publications. Although various country indicators had significant correlations with vaccine hesitancy publications, only gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national income (GNI) per capita were independent positive predictors of the number of publications. When the number of publications were standardized by GDP, the Gambia, Somalia and Malawi ranked highest in decreasing order. The United States, Canada and United Kingdom ranked highest (in that order) when standardized by current health expenditure. Overall, high-income countries were more productive in vaccine hesitancy research than low-and-middle-income countries. There is a need for more investment in research on vaccine hesitancy in low-and-middle-income countries.
| S-EPMC8381789 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The hypothesis of a Hierarchy of the Sciences, first formulated in the 19(th) century, predicts that, moving from simple and general phenomena (e.g. particle dynamics) to complex and particular (e.g. human behaviour), researchers lose ability to reach theoretical and methodological consensus. This hypothesis places each field of research along a continuum of complexity and "softness", with profound implications for our understanding of scientific knowledge. Today, however, the idea is still unproven and philosophically overlooked, too often confused with simplistic dichotomies that contrast natural and social sciences, or science and the humanities. Empirical tests of the hypothesis have usually compared few fields and this, combined with other limitations, makes their results contradictory and inconclusive. We verified whether discipline characteristics reflect a hierarchy, a dichotomy or neither, by sampling nearly 29,000 papers published contemporaneously in 12 disciplines and measuring a set of parameters hypothesised to reflect theoretical and methodological consensus. The biological sciences had in most cases intermediate values between the physical and the social, with bio-molecular disciplines appearing harder than zoology, botany or ecology. In multivariable analyses, most of these parameters were independent predictors of the hierarchy, even when mathematics and the humanities were included. These results support a "gradualist" view of scientific knowledge, suggesting that the Hierarchy of the Sciences provides the best rational framework to understand disciplines' diversity. A deeper grasp of the relationship between subject matter's complexity and consensus could have profound implications for how we interpret, publish, popularize and administer scientific research.
| S-EPMC3694152 | biostudies-other
Project description:Precision medicine is an approach to detecting, treating, and managing disease that is based on individual variation in genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors. Precision medicine is expected to reduce health disparities, but this will be possible only if studies have adequate representation of racial minorities.It is critical to anticipate the rates at which individuals from diverse populations are likely to participate in precision medicine studies as research initiatives are being developed. We evaluated the likelihood of participating in a clinical study for precision medicine.Observational study conducted between October 2010 and February 2011 in a national sample of African Americans.Intentions to participate in a government sponsored study that involves providing a biospecimen and generates data that could be shared with other researchers to conduct future studies.One third of respondents would participate in a clinical study for precision medicine. Only gender had a significant independent association with participation intentions. Men had a 1.86 (95% CI = 1.11, 3.12, p = 0.02) increased likelihood of participating in a precision medicine study compared to women in the model that included overall barriers and facilitators. In the model with specific participation barriers, distrust was associated with a reduced likelihood of participating in the research described in the vignette (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.34, 0.96, p = 0.04).African Americans may have low enrollment in PMI research. As PMI research is implemented, extensive efforts will be needed to ensure adequate representation. Additional research is needed to identify optimal ways of ethically describing precision medicine studies to ensure sufficient recruitment of racial minorities.
| S-EPMC4956119 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess HIV/AIDS research productivity in the 27 countries of the European Union (EU), and the structural level factors associated with levels of HIV/AIDS research productivity.MethodsA bibliometric analysis was conducted with systematic search methods used to locate HIV/AIDS research publications (period of 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2011; search databases: MEDLINE (Ovid, PubMed), EMBASE, ISI-Thomson Web of Science; no language restrictions). The publication rate (number of HIV/AIDS research publications per million population in 10?years) and the rate of articles published in HIV/AIDS journals and selected journals with moderate to very high (IF ?3) 5-year impact factors were used as markers for HIV research productivity. A negative binomial regression model was fitted to assess the impact of structural level factors (sociodemographic, health, HIV prevalence and research/development indicators) associated with the variation in HIV research productivity.ResultsThe total numbers of HIV/AIDS research publications in 2002-2011 by country ranged from 7 to 9128 (median 319). The median publication rate (per million population in 10?years) was 45 (range 5-150) for all publications. Across all countries, 16% of the HIV/AIDS research was published in HIV/AIDS journals and 7% in selected journals with IF ?3. Indicators describing economic (gross domestic product), demographic (size of the population) and epidemiological (HIV prevalence) conditions as well as overall scientific activity (total research output) in a country were positively associated with HIV research productivity.ConclusionsHIV research productivity varies noticeably across EU countries, and this variation is associated with recognisable structural factors.
| S-EPMC4322208 | biostudies-literature