Dataset Information

Systematic analysis of the scientific literature on population surveillance.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Population surveillance provides data on the health status of the population through continuous scrutiny of different indicators. Identifying risk factors is essential for the quickly detecting and controlling of epidemic outbreaks and reducing the incidence of cross-infections and non-communicable diseases. The objective of the present study is to analyze research on population surveillance, identifying the main topics of interest for investigators in the area.

Methodology

We included documents indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection in the period from 2000 to 2019 and assigned with the generic Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) "population surveillance" or its related terms ("public health surveillance," "sentinel surveillance" or "biosurveillance"). A co-occurrence analysis was undertaken to identify the document clusters comprising the main research topics. Scientific production, collaboration, and citation patterns in each of the clusters were characterized bibliometrically. We also analyzed research on coronaviruses, relating the results obtained to the management of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

We included 39,184 documents, which reflected a steady growth in scientific output driven by papers on "Public, Environmental & Occupational Health" (21.62% of the documents) and "Infectious Diseases" (10.49%). Research activity was concentrated in North America (36.41%) and Europe (32.09%). The USA led research in the area (40.14% of documents). Ten topic clusters were identified, including "Disease Outbreaks," which is closely related to two other clusters ("Genetics" and "Influenza"). Other clusters of note were "Cross Infections" as well as one that brought together general public health concepts and topics related to non-communicable diseases (cardiovascular and coronary diseases, mental diseases, diabetes, wound and injuries, stroke, and asthma). The rest of the clusters addressed "Neoplasms," "HIV," "Pregnancy," "Substance Abuse/Obesity," and "Tuberculosis." Although research on coronavirus has focused on population surveillance only occasionally, some papers have analyzed and collated guidelines whose relevance to the dissemination and management of the COVID-19 pandemic has become obvious. Topics include tracing the spread of the virus, limiting mass gatherings that would facilitate its propagation, and the imposition of quarantines. There were important differences in the scientific production and citation of different clusters: the documents on mental illnesses, stroke, substance abuse/obesity, and cross-infections had much higher citations than the clusters on disease outbreaks, tuberculosis, and especially coronavirus, where these values are substantially lower.

Conclusions

The role of population surveillance should be strengthened, promoting research and the development of public health surveillance systems in countries whose contribution to the area is limited.

SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Alcaide G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7528878 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) hosts some of the world's worst humanitarian and health crises. The implementation of health surveillance in this region has faced multiple constraints. New and novel approaches in surveillance are in a constant state of high and immediate demand. Identifying the existing literature on surveillance helps foster an understanding of scientific development and thus potentially supports future development directions.ObjectiveThis study aims to illustrate the scientific production, quantify the scholarly impact, and highlight the characteristics of publications on public health surveillance in the EMR over the past decade.MethodsWe performed a Scopus search using keywords related to public health surveillance or its disciplines, cross-referenced with EMR countries, from 2011 to July 2021. Data were exported and analyzed using Microsoft Excel and Visualization of Similarities Viewer. Quality of journals was determined using SCImago Journal Rank and CiteScore.ResultsWe retrieved 1987 documents, of which 1927 (96.98%) were articles or reviews. There has been an incremental increase in the number of publications (exponential growth, R2=0.80) over the past decade. Publications were mostly affiliated with Iran (501/1987, 25.21%), the United States (468/1987, 23.55%), Pakistan (243/1987, 12.23%), Egypt (224/1987, 11.27%), and Saudi Arabia (209/1987, 10.52%). However, Iran only had links with 40 other countries (total link strength 164), and the biggest collaborator from the EMR was Egypt, with 67 links (total link strength 402). Within the other EMR countries, only Morocco, Lebanon, and Jordan produced ≥79 publications in the 10-year period. Most publications (1551/1987, 78.06%) were affiliated with EMR universities. Most journals were categorized as medical journals, and the highest number of articles were published in the Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal (SCImago Journal Rank 0.442; CiteScore 1.5). Retrieved documents had an average of 18.4 (SD 125.5) citations per document and an h-index of 66. The top-3 most cited documents were from the Global Burden of Diseases study. We found 70 high-frequency terms, occurring ≥10 times in author keywords, connected in 3 clusters. COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, and pandemic represented the most recent 2020 cluster.ConclusionsThis is the first research study to quantify the published literature on public health surveillance and its disciplines in the EMR. Research productivity has steadily increased over the past decade, and Iran has been the leading country publishing relevant research. Recurrent recent surveillance themes included COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2. This study also sheds light on the gaps in surveillance research in the EMR, including inadequate publications on noncommunicable diseases and injury-related surveillance.

Project description:Abstract Repeatability is the cornerstone of science, and it is particularly important for systematic reviews. However, little is known on how researchers’ choice of database, and search platform influence the repeatability of systematic reviews. Here, we aim to unveil how the computer environment and the location where the search was initiated from influence hit results. We present a comparative analysis of time‐synchronized searches at different institutional locations in the world and evaluate the consistency of hits obtained within each of the search terms using different search platforms. We revealed a large variation among search platforms and showed that PubMed and Scopus returned consistent results to identical search strings from different locations. Google Scholar and Web of Science's Core Collection varied substantially both in the number of returned hits and in the list of individual articles depending on the search location and computing environment. Inconsistency in Web of Science results has most likely emerged from the different licensing packages at different institutions. To maintain scientific integrity and consistency, especially in systematic reviews, action is needed from both the scientific community and scientific search platforms to increase search consistency. Researchers are encouraged to report the search location and the databases used for systematic reviews, and database providers should make search algorithms transparent and revise access rules to titles behind paywalls. Additional options for increasing the repeatability and transparency of systematic reviews are storing both search metadata and hit results in open repositories and using Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) to retrieve standardized, machine‐readable search metadata. The consistency level with which scientific search platforms return hits for the same search initiated at different locations and from different computing environments was investigated. Scopus and PubMed returned the same results regardless of the location or computing environment but Web of Science and Google Scholar varied substantially. Since this is a crucial issue for the repeatability of systematic reviews, action should be taken to improve the within‐database consistency in the returned search hits.

Project description:Waste is part of the agenda of the European Environment and Health Process and included among the topics of the Sixth Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health. Disposal and management of hazardous waste are worldwide challenges. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the evidence of the health impact of hazardous waste exposure, applying transparent and a priori defined methods. The following five steps, based on pre-defined systematic criteria, were applied. 1. Specify the research question, in terms of "Population-Exposure-Comparators-Outcomes" (PECO).Populationpeople living near hazardous waste sites; Exposure: exposure to hazardous waste; Comparators: all comparators; Outcomes: all diseases/health disorders. 2. Carry out the literature search, in Medline and EMBASE. 3. Select studies for inclusion: original epidemiological studies, published between 1999 and 2015, on populations residentially exposed to hazardous waste. 4. Assess the quality of selected studies, taking into account study design, exposure and outcome assessment, confounding control. 5. Rate the confidence in the body of evidence for each outcome taking into account the reliability of each study, the strength of the association and concordance of results.Fifty-seven papers of epidemiological investigations on the health status of populations living near hazardous waste sites were selected for the evidence evaluation. The association between 95 health outcomes (diseases and disorders) and residential exposure to hazardous waste sites was evaluated. Health effects of residential hazardous waste exposure, previously partially unrecognized, were highlighted. Sufficient evidence was found of association between exposure to oil industry waste that releases high concentrations of hydrogen sulphide and acute symptoms. The evidence of causal relationship with hazardous waste was defined as limited for: liver, bladder, breast and testis cancers, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, asthma, congenital anomalies overall and anomalies of the neural tube, urogenital, connective and musculoskeletal systems, low birth weight and pre-term birth; evidence was defined as inadequate for the other health outcomes. The results, although not conclusive, provide indications that more effective public health policies on hazardous waste management are urgently needed. International, national and local authorities should oppose and eliminate poor, outdated and illegal practices of waste disposal, including illegal transboundary trade, and increase support regulation and its enforcement.

Project description:Background and purposeBreast cancer is the most common malignancy in women and radiation therapy (RT) is crucial in its multimodality management. Since bibliometrics is a powerful tool to reveal the scientific literature, we decided to perform a bibliometric analysis of the literature on breast cancer radiotherapy. We explored emerging trends and common patterns in research, tracking collaboration and networks, and foreseeing future directions in this clinical setting.Material and methodsThe electronic Scopus database was searched using the keywords "breast cancer" and "radiotherapy" to include manuscripts published in English, between 2000 and 2021. Data analysis was performed using R-Studio 0.98.1091 software with a machine-learning bibliometric method, based on the bibliometrix R package. The most relevant authors were quantified per number and fractionalized number of authored documents. Author productivity was analysed through Lotka's law. Bradford's law was applied to identify the nucleus of journals focused on the addressed topic. Mainstream themes area included isolated topics (niche themes), new topics (emerging themes), hot topics (motor themes) and essential topics (basic themes).ResultsA total of 27 184 documents was found, mainly original articles (76 %). The annual growth rate was 6.98 %, with an increase in scientific production from 485 to 2000 documents between 2000 and 2021. Overall, 2 544 journals published ≥ 1 documents. The most relevant authors were affiliated in the United States. Surgical procedures, cancer type and treatment strategies represented basic themes, while primary systemic therapy and sentinel lymph node biopsy were emerging themes. Health-related quality of life was a niche theme, while RT techniques had high centrality.ConclusionThe primary interests of breast cancer radiation oncologists have evolved over time, adding safety, health related quality of life, sustainability of treatments and combination to systemic therapies to radiotherapy efficacy and effectiveness and treatment outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesThe rapid production of a large volume of literature during the early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak created a substantial burden for clinicians and scientists. Therefore, this manuscript aims to identify and describe the scientific literature addressing COVID-19 from a dental research perspective, in terms of the manuscript origin, research domain, study type, and level of evidence (LoE).Materials and methodsData were retrieved from Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed. A descriptive analysis of bibliographic data, collaboration network, and keyword co-occurrence analysis were performed. Articles were further classified according to the field of interest, main research question, type of study, and LoE.ResultsThe present study identified 296 dental scientific COVID-19 original papers, published in 89 journals, and co-authored by 1331 individuals affiliated with 429 institutions from 53 countries. Although 81.4% were single-country papers, extensive collaboration among the institutions of single countries (Italian, British, and Brazilian institutions) was observed. The main research areas were as follows: the potential use of saliva and other oral fluids as promising samples for COVID-19 testing, dental education, and guidelines for the prevention of COVID-19 transmission in dental practice. The majority of articles were narrative reviews, cross-sectional studies, and short communications. The overall LoE in the analyzed dental literature was low, with only two systematic reviews with the highest LoE I.ConclusionThe dental literature on the COVID-19 pandemic does not provide data relevant to the evidence-based decision-making process. Future studies with a high LoE are essential to gain precise knowledge on COVID-19 infection within the various fields of Dentistry.Clinical relevanceThe published dental literature on COVID-19 consists principally of articles with a low level of scientific evidence which do not provide sufficient reliable high-quality evidence that is essential for decision making in clinical dental practice.