Project description:BackgroundWithin the past decade, Africa has faced several recurrent outbreaks of Ebola virus disease (EVD), including the 2014-2016 outbreak in West Africa and the recent 2018-2020 Kivu outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The study thus aimed at quantifying and mapping the scientific output of EVD research published within 2010-2020 though a bibliometric perspective.MethodsEVD-related publications from 2010 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases by using the keywords 'Ebola', 'Ebola Virus Disease', 'Ebolas', and 'ebolavirus'. Biblioshiny software (using R-studio cloud) was used to categorise and evaluate authors', countries' and journals' contribution. VOSviewer was used for network visualisation.ResultsAccording to the used search strategy, a total of 3865 and 3848 EVD documents were published in WoS and Scopus, respectively. The average citation per document was 16.1 (WoS) and 16.3 (Scopus). The results show an overall increase in the publication trend within the study period. The leading countries in EVD research were the USA and UK, with over 100 papers in both databases, including Nigeria and South Africa. NIAID and CDC-USA were the most influential institutions, while "Infectious Diseases" and "Medicine" were the most decisive research fields. The most contributing authors included Feldmann H and Qiu XG with over 60 papers in each database, while Journal of Infectious Diseases was the most crucial journal. The most cited article was from Aylward et al. published in 2014, while recent years displayed a keyword focus on "double-blind", "efficacy", "ring vaccination" and "drug effect".ConclusionThis bibliometric analysis provides an updated historical perspective of progress in EVD research and has highlighted the role played by various stakeholders. However, the contribution of African countries and institutions is not sufficiently reflected, implying a need for increased funding and focus on EVD research for effective prevention and control.
Project description:BackgroundBone defects can be seen everywhere in the clinic, but it is still a challenge for clinicians. Bibliometrics tool CiteSpace is based on the principle of "co-citation analysis theory" to reveal new technologies, hotspots, and trends in the medical field. In this study, CiteSpace was used to perform co-citation analysis on authors, countries (regions) and institutions, journals and cited journals, authors and cited literature, as well as keywords to reveal leaders, cooperative institutions, and research hotspots of bone defects and predict development trends.MethodData related to bone defect from 1994 to 2019 were retrieved from the Web of Science core collection; then, we use Excel to construct an exponential function to predict the number of annual publications; conduct a descriptive analysis on the top 10 journals with the largest number of publications; and perform co-citation analysis on authors, countries (regions) and institutions, journals and cited journals, authors and cited reference, and keywords using CiteSpace V5.5 and use the Burst Detection Algorithm to perform analysis on the countries (regions) and institutions and keywords, as well as cluster the keywords using log-likelihood ratio.ResultsA total of 5193 studies were retrieved, and the number of annual publications of bone defects showed an exponential function Y = 1×10- 70e0.0829x (R2 = 0.9778). The high-yield author was Choi Seong-Ho at Yonsei University in South Korea. The high-yielding countries were the USA and Germany, and the high-yielding institutions were the Sao Paulo University and China and the Chinese Academy of Sciences which were the emerging research countries and institutions. The research results were mainly published in the fields of dentistry, bone, and metabolism. Among them, the Journal of Dental Research and Journal of Bone and Mineral Research were high-quality journals that report bone defect research, but the most cited journal was the Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. Hot keywords were regeneration, repair, in vitro, bone regeneration, reconstruction, and graft. The keywords that were strongly cited in 2010-2019 were transportation, osteogenic differentiation, proliferation, and biomaterials. After 2018, proliferation, osteogenic differentiation, stromal cells, transmission, and mechanical properties have become new vocabulary. The drug delivery, vascularization, osteogenic differentiation and biomaterial properties of bone defects were expected to be further studied.ConclusionThe application of CiteSpace can reveal the leaders, cooperating institutions and research hotspots of bone defects and provide references for new technologies and further research directions.
Project description:Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is ravaging the world. Many therapies have been explored to treat COVID-19. This report aimed to assess the global research trends for the development of COVID-19 therapies. Methods We searched the relevant articles on COVID-19 therapies published from January 1, 2020, to May 25, 2022, in the Web of Science Core Collection Database (WOSCC). VOSviewer 1.6.18 software was used to assess data on the countries, institutions, authors, collaborations, keywords, and journals that were most implicated in COVID-19 pharmacological research. The latest research and changing trends in COVID-19-relevant pharmacological research were analyzed. Results After manually eliminating articles that do not meet the requirements, a total of 5,289 studies authored by 32,932 researchers were eventually included in the analyses, which comprised 95 randomized controlled trials. 3044 (57.6%) studies were published in 2021. The USA conducted the greatest number of studies, followed by China and India. The primary USA collaborators were China and England. The topics covered in the publications included: the general characteristics, the impact on pharmacists’ work, the pharmacological research, broad-spectrum antiviral drug therapy and research, and promising targets or preventive measures, such as vaccine. The temporal diagram revealed that the current research hotspots focused on the vaccine, molecular docking, Mpro, and drug delivery keywords. Conclusion Comprehensive bibliometric analysis can aid the rapid identification of the principal research topics, potential collaborators, and the direction of future research. Pharmacological research is critical for the development of therapeutic and preventive COVID-19-associated measures. This study may therefore provide valuable information for eradicating COVID-19.
Project description:ObjectiveIn this study, the current state of research on traditional Mongolian medicine (TMM) through a bibliometric analysis of research documents located in the Web of Science (WoS) database was assessed.MethodsThe WoS database was searched on September 2021 with the keywords "traditional Mongolian medicine." Publications on TMM scientific research were included in this study, without any language limitations. Bibliometric data from such publications were retrieved from the WoS database. Full records with cited reference lists were descriptively analyzed. To assess trends in TMM research topics, authors' keywords were analyzed. A thematic evolution map based on coword analysis was suggested. To analyze research networks among co-authors, affiliations, or countries of the authors, collaboration networks were evaluated. The Bibliometrix R package (3.1) was used for the analysis.ResultsA total of 234 scientific publications were included in the analysis. The top three countries of origin of the corresponding authors were China (n = 153), Japan (n = 28), and South Korea (n = 9). The top three relevant affiliations of the authors in the included publications were "Inner Mongolia Medical University," "Inner Mongolia University of Nationalities," and "National University of Mongolia." "Flavonoids," "cytotoxicity," "NMR," and "Tibetan medicine" were the most frequently used keywords in the included documents. Most publications focused on the chemical analysis and mechanism of effects of Mongolian herbal medications. There were few publications on nonpharmacological interventions such as bloodletting or TMM diagnostics, which should be promoted in future publications.ConclusionThere were only a limited number of publications on TMM identified through a search of the WoS database, using the keywords "Traditional Mongolian medicine." More improved strategy for searching for TMM publications must be established. Research publications on TMM, especially regarding nonpharmacological interventions, need to be promoted. In addition, collaboration with researchers worldwide needs to be encouraged in the future.
Project description:The World Health Organization recognizes noma as a global health problem and has suggested prioritizing research into this disease. A bibliographic search of original articles published in the Web of Science database up to 2022 was performed. A bibliometric analysis was carried out with the bibliometrix package in R and VOSviewer. We identified 251 articles published in 130 journals. The first publication was in 1975, the highest number of publications was in 2003, and the average number of citations per document was 12.59. The author with the highest number of publications was Enwonwu CO, and the Noma Children's Hospital had the highest number of articles on this topic. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery was the journal with the most publications, and the study by Petersen PE was the most cited. The country of corresponding authors that had the most publications and the most significant number of total citations was the United States. "Children" and "Reconstruction" were the most used keywords. In conclusion, there are few publications on noma worldwide, confirming the neglected status of this disease. Urgent actions are needed to increase evidence in regard to the epidemiology of noma and public health interventions to mitigate the ravages of this disease.
Project description:Coronaviruses (CoV) cause respiratory and intestinal infections. We conducted this bibliometric analysis and systematical review to explore the CoV-related research trends from before COVID-19. We systematically searched the Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Web of Science (WOS) databases for published bibliometric analyses of CoV from database inception to January 24, 2021. The WOS Collection was searched from inception to January 31, 2020, to acquire the CoV-related publications before COVID-19. One-Way ANOVA and Bonferroni multiple-comparison tests were used to compare differences. Visualization mapping and keyword cluster graphs were made to illustrate the research topics and hotpots. We included 14,141 CoV-related publications for the bibliometric analysis and 16 (12 articles) CoV-related bibliometric analyses for the systematic review. Both the systematic review and bibliometric analysis showed (1) the number of publications showed two steep upward trajectories in 2003-2004 and in 2012-2014; (2) the research hotpots mainly focused on the mechanism, pathology, epidemiology, clinical diagnosis, and treatment of the coronavirus in MERS-CoV and SARS-Cov; (3) the USA, and China; the University of Hong Kong; and Yuen KY, came from the University of Hong Kong contributed most; (4) the Journal of Virology had the largest number of CoV related studies. More studies should focus on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in the future.
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.
Project description:Purpose: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, which began in December 2019, has not been completely controlled; therefore, COVID-19 has received much attention from countries around the world. Many related clinical studies, such as clinical trials, have been published, but to the knowledge of the authors, there has been no bibliometric analysis of these publications focusing on clinical research studies on COVID-19. Methods: Global publications on COVID-19 from January 2020 to December 2020 were extracted from the Web of Science (WOS) collection database. The VOSviewer software and CiteSpace were employed to perform a bibliometric study. In addition, we obtained information on relevant clinical trials from the website http://clinicaltrials.gov. Results: China published most of the articles in this field and had the highest number of citations and H-index. The Journal of Medical Virology published most of the articles related to COVID-19. In terms of institutions, Huazhong University of Science and Technology had the most publications, and Wang, JW received the highest number of citations. Conclusion: The diagnosis, prevention, and prognosis of COVID-19 are still the focus of attention at present. The overall analysis of the disease were identified as the emerging topics from the perspectives of epidemiology and statistics. However, finding an effective treatment remains the focus of clinical trials.
Project description:Despite the increasing number of publications globally, the COVID-19 pandemic has underscored significant research gaps that should be resolved, including within PC-related research. This study aimed to map and understand the global trends in palliative care (PC)-related COVID-19 research and provide quantitative evidence to guide future studies. We systematically searched four databases between 1st January 2020 and 25th April 2022. The VOSviewer, Gephi, and R software were utilized for data analysis and results visualization. A total of 673 articles were identified from the databases between 1st January 2020 and 25th April 2022. Canada (6.2%), Australia (5.4%), and the United Kingdom (3.8%) were the most productive countries regarding articles published per million confirmed COVID-19 cases. A lack of international collaborations and an uneven research focus on PC across countries with different pandemic trajectories was observed. The PC research in question focused on cancer, telehealth, death and dying, and bereavement. This study's conclusions support the recommendation for international collaboration to facilitate knowledge and practice transformation to support countries with unmet PC needs during the pandemic. Further studies are required on the grief and bereavement support of families, healthcare professionals and patients with other life-threatening illnesses.