bims-evares Biomed News
on Evaluation of research
Issue of 2020‒08‒30
forty-six papers selected by
Thomas Krichel
Open Library Society


  1. BMC Pulm Med. 2020 Aug 27. 20(1): 229
    He B, Zhang P, Cai Q, Shi S, Xie H, Zhang Y, Peng X, Zhao Z, Yin W, Wang X.
      BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy is applied broadly in the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary diseases. Over the past few decades, an increasing number of studies about bronchoscopy have been published. However, little is known about their qualities and characteristics.METHODS: All of the databases in Web of Science (including the Web of Science Core Collection, BIOSIS Citation Index, KCI-Korean Journal Database, MEDLINE, Russian Science Citation Index, and SciELO Citation Index) were utilized to identify articles published from 1990 to 2020. The top 100 most cited articles about bronchoscopy were selected for degree centrality analysis and analyses regarding publication time, total citation number, the citation density, time-related flux, first author, published journal, geographic origin, and research theme.
    RESULTS: The selected articles were published mainly in the 2000s and 1990s. Citations per article ranged from 731 to 196. The leading country was the USA, followed by the United Kingdom. The most frequently studied themes were bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid and biopsy. The degree centrality analysis connoted that "BAL, inflammation, diagnosis" had a high degree of centrality in the 1990s, while "diagnosis, BAL, biopsy, prospective" took centre stage in the 2000s.
    CONCLUSIONS: The time, area, and theme distribution of the 100 most cited articles on bronchoscopy have been thoroughly analyzed. It is noticeable that researches based on BAL and endobronchial or transbronchial biopsies currently plays a major role.
    Keywords:  Bronchoscopy; Citations; Most-cited papers
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-020-01266-9
  2. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020 Aug 21.
    Shiah E, Heiman AJ, Ricci JA.
      BACKGROUND: Scholarly output has typically been measured by citation-based metrics such as the Hirsch index (H-index). The Altmetric Attention Score has emerged as a substitute to measure digital attention given to a project. This study aims to determine if there is any correlation between H-index and the Altmetric Score in the plastic surgery literature.METHODS: Article metrics (full text views, abstract views, PDF downloads, times emailed, Altmetric Attention Score, times tweeted, and number of citations by posts) were extracted from articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery over a two-year period. Author metrics, including H5-index, were also collected. Pairwise correlations were performed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r).
    RESULTS: A total of 1,668 articles were published, with 971 included. Altmetric Scores showed strong correlation with other article metrics (r = 0.48-0.97, p < 0.001); but weak correlation with H5-index (r = 0.14, p < 0.001) and sum of times cited without self-citation (r = 0.14, p < 0.001). It did not correlate with total publications, average citations per item or sum of times cited. H5-indexes showed strong positive correlation with other author bibliometrics (r = 0.66-0.97, p < 0.001); moderate correlation with times emailed (r = 0.41, p < 0.001); weak correlation with number of citations by posts (r = 0.10, p = 0.002); and no correlation with full text views, abstract views, PDF downloads, and times tweeted.
    CONCLUSIONS: The Altmetric Attention Score and conventional senior author bibliometrics have weak positive correlation at best and appear to have distinct but complementary roles in measuring scholarly output.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000007270
  3. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. 2020 Aug 25. 37(4): 602-607
    Zhang Y, Liu X, Fan Y.
      Rapid development is undergoing in the field of rehabilitation robots, and more countries (regions) are participating in international cooperation and becoming academic contributors. Here in this study, the bibliometric method is used to determine the dynamics and developments of international cooperation in China. The publication data are indexed in Web of Science with search term of rehabilitation robot from 2000 to 2019. Compared with other countries (regions), publication with international co-authors and institutes participating in international cooperation are studied by assessment of indicators such as the cooperation degree, cooperation frequency, and the frequency of citations. The results show that in the past two decades, international scientific cooperation has shown a positive tendency in China, and participating in international collaboration could improve China's impact on the global rehabilitation robot. The United States, England and Japan are the top three countries in number of cooperation with China. Our findings provide valuable information for researchers to better understand China's international scientific collaboration in rehabilitation robot.
    Keywords:  bibliometric; cooperation degree; cooperation rate; international cooperation; rehabilitation robots
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.7507/1001-5515.202005006
  4. Global Spine J. 2020 Aug 28. 2192568220952074
    Yin M, Xu C, Mo W.
      STUDY DESIGN: Bibliometric analysis.OBJECTIVE: With the increasing literature of spine surgery, some pioneering research studies have had a significant impact on the field of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). The objective of the authors was to identify and analyze the most frequently cited 100 articles in this field.
    METHODS: Web of Science was searched to identify 100 top-cited articles related to LSS from 2000 to 2019. Articles on the final list were filtered based on their titles and abstracts. The following information were recorded and analyzed with bibliometric method: article title, first author, year of publication, journal of publication, total number of citations, country, institution, and study topic.
    RESULTS: The citation count for final articles on the list ranged from 71 to 2162, with a mean number of 207.7. The journal Spine contributed the maximum number of articles (37), followed by European Spine Journal (9) and Pain Physician (8). There were collectively 80 first authors contributing to articles on the final list. Twelve authors were represented multiple times in the top 100 articles. The most prolific years were 2008 and 2009, each had 11 articles published. With regard to country and region of origin, most articles were from the United States (58). The most cited article was published in Spine in 2000 by Fairbank and Pynsent, who discussed the role of the Oswestry Disability Index as an evaluation standard in spinal disorders, including LSS.
    CONCLUSION: The current study analyzed the 100 most cited articles on LSS. It no doubt developed a useful resource with detailed information for many, particularly orthopedic and neurosurgery physicians who want to assimilate research focus and advance of LSS within a relatively short period. Researchers may benefit from emphasis on citation count while citing and evaluating articles and realize the deficiencies when high-level articles appear.
    Keywords:  LSS; bibliometric analysis; citation; lumbar spinal stenosis; most cited articles
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568220952074
  5. Br J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug 27. pii: bjophthalmol-2020-316609. [Epub ahead of print]
    Koh BMQR, Banu R, Nusinovici S, Sabanayagam C.
      Diabetic retinopathy (DR) research has had significant advancements over the past decades. We analysed the impact and characteristics of the top 100 (T100) most-cited articles in DR research. The Scopus database was searched for articles published from 1960 to June 2020 by two independent investigators. The T100 DR articles were published between 1961 and 2017 with median citations of 503 (range: 306-20 100); 84% were published after 1990. More than half (59%) were published in general medical/diabetes journals while 37% in ophthalmology journals. The top six journals contributed to 56% of the T100: Ophthalmology (n=13), Archives of Ophthalmology (n=12), Diabetes (n=9), New England Journal of Medicine (n=8), Journal of the American Medical Association (n=7) and The Lancet (n=7). Although observational studies were most popular (33%), randomised controlled trials (RCTs, 24%) published in journals with higher impact factor (IF) and citations (median IF and citations=7.113, 503 vs 21.437, 696.5, both p-value<0.05). 33 of the T100 were cited by several international DR clinical guidelines. The USA contributed to 63% of T100, but 18% of articles published after 2000 came from Asia. More than 80% of both first and last authors were men. Artificial intelligence (AI) to screen for DR ranked 14th and 99th despite recent publications in 2016 and 2017, respectively. To conclude, our T100 analysis showed that RCTs were most-cited and more articles were published in non-ophthalmology than ophthalmology journals. It highlights the impact the T100 DR has in shaping guidelines used to date in DR management, identifies AI for DR screening as an emerging area and shows a contemporary rise of Asian contribution in DR research.
    Keywords:  Epidemiology
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-316609
  6. World Neurosurg. 2020 Aug 19. pii: S1878-8750(20)31884-2. [Epub ahead of print]
    Elarjani T, Almutairi OT, Alhussinan M, Alnefaie N, Alzhrani G, Bafaquh M, Alturki AY.
      BACKGROUND: Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH) is a rare cause of intracranial bleeding across all age groups, with a dismal sequela in the majority of the affected population. The published literature on IVH is numerous, with multiple levels of evidence degrees. We aim to perform a citation-based analysis to identify the most-cited articles on IVH.METHODS: A thorough search of the Scopus database was conducted using "Intraventricular Hemorrhage" as a search keyword. The 100 most cited articles were stratified in descending order. Articles were reviewed in-depth and categorized accordingly. Bibliometric parameters of interest were obtained for analysis.
    RESULTS: The most-cited articles were published between 1927 and 2017. Most articles (60) were published between 1980 and 2000. The highest-cited articles received a total of 16512 citations and 174 average citations per paper. Studies on pathogenesis were the most-prolific, with 23 articles on the list. Thirteen Randomised Control Trials (RCT) were identified. The topmost contributing country was the US, having produced 67 articles. The leading institution was the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, with 11 articles of contribution. Pediatrics was the most active journal by producing 20 articles in the list.
    CONCLUSION: The current collection of highly cited works aids in the understanding of chronological trends and serves as an efficient guide to delineate the articles involved in the evidence-based practice in the management of IVH.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric; Citation Analysis; Intraventricular Hemorrhage; Subarachnoid Hemorrrhage; Traumatic Brain Injury
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.08.115
  7. Tour Manag Perspect. 2020 Jul;35 100715
    Zhang C, Wang S, Sun S, Wei Y.
      Utilizing a scientometric review of global trends and structure from 388 bibliographic records over two decades (1999-2018), this study seeks to advance the building of comprehensive knowledge maps that draw upon global travel demand studies. The study, using the techniques of co-citation analysis, collaboration network and emerging trends analysis, identified major disciplines that provide knowledge and theories for tourism demand forecasting, many trending research topics, the most critical countries, institutions, publications, and articles, and the most influential researchers. The increasing interest and output for big data and machine learning techniques in the field were visualized via comprehensive knowledge maps. This research provides meaningful guidance for researchers, operators and decision makers who wish to improve the accuracy of tourism demand forecasting.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric analysis; CiteSpace; Hospitality demand; Infographic; Knowledge map; Tourist arrival
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100715
  8. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020 Aug 19. pii: S0003-4975(20)31324-2. [Epub ahead of print]
    Luc JGY, Vervoort D, Percy E, Hirji S, Mann GK, Phan K, Dibas M, Vaduganathan M, Preventza O, Antonoff MB.
      BACKGROUND: Women continue to comprise a small minority of cardiothoracic surgeons. Representation of women in areas of academic achievement has not been well characterized. This study aims to evaluate female representation among authorship positions in high-impact articles published in the Annals of Thoracic Surgery.METHODS: Altmetric scores were used to identify the top 50 articles published in 2013, 2015, and 2017 in the Annals of Thoracic Surgery. Article characteristics as well as author demographics were collected. Bibliometric analysis was performed to identify longitudinal changes with regard to female representation as first and last authors.
    RESULTS: Female authors remain underrepresented in authorship, despite a temporal trend towards improvement in female representation over the years for first (16% in 2013, 22% in 2015, 20% in 2017) and last author positions (8% in 2013, 16% in 2015, 20% in 2017). Articles authored by women were equally likely to achieve high impact as compared to males, as evaluated by Altmetric score (women 30.1±38.6 vs. men 39.1±73.5, p=0.53), citations (women 14.3±19.1 vs. men 17.6±20.8, p=0.45), and to be mentioned by news outlets, blogs, patents, Facebook, Wikipedia, Mendeley, Google, LinkedIn, and Reddit. Female first and last authors achieved comparable numbers of publications and H-index scores compared to male authors.
    CONCLUSIONS: Significant sex-based differences in authorship representation persist, but with favorable improvement in female representation over time. Importantly, citations and high-impact status were independent of author sex. Characterization of the representation of women in academic achievement helps us strive for gender equity in our specialty.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.06.031
  9. Front Public Health. 2020 ;8 343
    Rossa-Roccor V, Acheson ES, Andrade-Rivas F, Coombe M, Ogura S, Super L, Hong A.
      Background: Planetary health is an emerging holistic health field to foster interdisciplinary collaborations, integrate Indigenous knowledge, facilitate education, and drive public and policy engagement. To understand to what extent the field has successfully met these goals, we conducted a scoping review and bibliometric analysis. Methods: We searched 15 databases from 2005 to 2019 for peer-reviewed publications with the term "planetary health" in the title, abstract and/or keywords, with no language or geographical location limitations. We classified results into four categories (commentaries, comprehensive syntheses, educational material, and original research) and categorized original research according to expert-derived planetary health themes. Our bibliometric analysis highlighted publications over time, collaborations, and networks of keywords. Findings: Only 8.1% (n = 22) were research articles. Publications rose rapidly from 8 to 64 publications per year in 2015-2018. The top five author affiliation countries for most publications were the US, UK, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, and the top five collaborations were a subset of pairwise combinations between the US, UK, Australia, and Canada. The most common author keywords were the following: planetary health, climate change, ecology, and non-communicable diseases. Keyword co-occurrences clustered around high-level concepts (e.g., Anthropocene) and food system-related topics; two clusters lacked a theme. Interpretation: We show that the term planetary health is used mainly in commentary-like publications, not original research. Additionally, more global collaborations are lacking. Interdisciplinary work, as represented by keyword co-occurrence networks, is developing but could potentially be extended. The planetary health community should promote more worldwide research and interdisciplinary collaborations.
    Keywords:  holistic health fields; interdisciplinary research; keyword network analysis; planetary health collaborations; planetary health themes
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00343
  10. Eur Spine J. 2020 Aug 25.
    Chen K, Zhao J, Yang Y, Wei X, Chen Z, Li M, Zhai X.
      OBJECTIVE: With the population aging, there is an associated rise in the prevalence of adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). However, limited data were found to elaborate the trend of ADS research. Our study aims to investigate the global trend of ADS research in this decade.METHODS: ADS-related publications from 2010 to 2019 were extracted from the Web of Science and Medline database. Excel 2016, GraphPad Prism 6, and VOSviewer software were adopted to analyze the search results for number of publications, citation, and H-index.
    RESULTS: A total of 1282 papers were included and were cited 16,770 times. The USA accounted for 40.41% of the articles, 60.35% of the citations, and the highest H-index of 51. China ranked second in total number of articles, third in citation frequency (1373), and fourth with an H-index of 18. The journal Spine (IF = 2.903, 2019) had the highest number of publications. Shaffery CI published the most articles in this field (40). Key words of ADS research were classified into three clusters: "Surgical technique," "Mechanism," and "Radiological parameter." The "Radiological parameter" cluster became the most popular, and it came with the latest hot spots of "slope," "cervical lordosis," "mismatch," and "PI-LL."
    CONCLUSION: Literature growth in ADS was rapidly expanding in this decade. The USA was the most productive country and also had a largest quantity of top authors and institutes, so that scholars can keep following and cooperated with. Radiological parameter was an emerging topic and might also be a hot spot in the near future.
    Keywords:  Adult degenerative scoliosis; Bibliometric; Citation; H-index; VOSviewer
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06574-6
  11. Scientometrics. 2020 May 25. 1-10
    Zhu J, Liu W.
      China's rising in scientific research output is impressive. The academic community is curious about the time when the cross-over in the number of annual scientific publication production between China and the USA can happen. By using Web of Science Core Collection's Science Citation Index Expanded database, this study finds that China still ranks the second in the production of SCI-indexed publications in 2019 but may leapfrog the USA to be the first in 2020 or 2021, if all document types are considered. Comparatively, China has already overtaken the USA and been the largest SCI-indexed original research article producer since 2018. However, China still lags behind the USA regarding the number of review paper production. In general, quantitative advantage does not equal quality or impact advantage. We think that the USA will continue to be the global scientific leader for a long time.
    Keywords:  China; Research evaluation; Science Citation Index; Scientific research; United States
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03525-2
  12. Scientometrics. 2020 Jul 01. 1-25
    Belli S, Mugnaini R, Baltà J, Abadal E.
      The COVID-19 pandemic is creating a global health emergency. Mapping this health emergency in scientific publications demands multiple approaches to obtain a picture as complete as possible. To progress in the knowledge of this pandemic and to control its effects, international collaborations between researchers are essentials, as well as having open and immediate access to scientific publications, what we called "coopetition". Our main objectives are to identify the most productive countries in coronavirus publications, to analyse the international scientific collaboration on this topic, and to study the proportion and typology of open accessibility to these publications. We have analyzed 18,875 articles indexed in Web of Science. We performed the descriptive statistical analysis in order to explore the performance of the more prolific countries and organizations, as well as paying attention to the last 2 years. Registers have been analyzed separately via the VOSviewer software, drawing a network of links among countries and organizations to identify the starred countries and organizations, and the strongest links of the net. We have explored the capacity of researchers to generate scientific knowledge about a health crisis emergency, and their global capacity to collaborate among them in a global emergency. We consider that science is moving rapidly to find solutions to international health problems but access to this knowledge by society is not so quick due to several limitations (open access policies, corporate interests, etc.). We have observed that papers from China in the last 3 months (from January 2020 to March 2020) have a strong impact compared with papers published in years before. The United States and China are the major producers of documents of our sample, followed by all European countries, especially the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and France. At the same time, the leading role of Saudi Arabia, Canada or South Korea should be noted, with a significant number of documents submitted but very different dynamics of international collaboration. The proportion of international collaboration is growing in all countries in 2019-2020, which contrasts with the situation of the last two decades. The organizations providing the most documents to the sample are mostly Chinese. The percentage of open access articles on coronavirus for the period 2001-2020 is 59.2% but if we focus in 2020 the figures increase up to 91.4%, due to the commitment of commercial publishers with the emergency.
    Keywords:  2019-nCoV; Bibliometric analysis; COVID-19; Coronavirus; Open access; SARS-CoV-2; Scientific collaborations
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03590-7
  13. Curr Drug Metab. 2020 Aug 25.
    Hassan W, Kamdem JP, Kamal MA, da Rocha JBT.
      BACKGROUND: Scopus is regularly covering Current Drug Metabolism from 2000 onwards.OBJECTIVE: The major objective is to perform the 1st bibliometric analysis of Current Drug Metabolism (CDM).
    METHODS: The data was retrieved from Scopus in April-May, 2020 for detail analysis.
    RESULTS: The total number of publications was found to be 1551 with 955 reviews (61.57%) and 466 articles (30.05%). The yearly relative growth rate was calculated from 2000 onwards and the doubling time was found to be 4.7. Based on the number of publications, total 4418 authors, 3235 institutions and 83 countries were directly involved in all publications. M.A. Kamal is the highly productive scientist with fifty three (53 or 3.73%) publications, King Abdulaziz University is the top university with highest publications (58 or 4.13%) and USA is the top ranked country with 365 publications (25.96%). We also provided the h-index, total citations (TC), h-index without selfcitations (WSC) and total WSC of top ten authors, universities and countries. In citations analysis, Prof. Zhou S.F. is the top scientist with highest (1594) number of citations, followed by Department of Drug Metabolism, Merck Research Laboratories, Rahway, United States, with 654 citations (in institutional category) and United States with 18409 citations is the top ranked country. While in co-words analysis, 3387, 30564 and 17333 terms in titles of the manuscripts, abstracts and keywords were recorded, respectively. Which indicated that CDM principally focused on understanding the drug development ranging from its efficacy to delivery, metabolism, distribution, safety and mechanism of actions. Similarly various specific drugs were thoroughly discussed in publications. Various enzymatic, genetics, proteins and cancer related aspects were also described. For data presentations we used VOSviewer graphical maps.
    CONCLUSION: The data confirms that CDM showed a continuous growth in the number of publications and citations. However significant measures are needed to make overall progress and improve the rankings in relevant categories.
    Keywords:  CDM; Scopus; Vosviewer.; bibliometry; doubling time; growth rate
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.2174/1389200221666200826094233
  14. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Aug 21. 99(34): e21828
    Ding Y, Chen D, Ding X, Wang G, Wan Y, Shen Q.
      BACKGROUND: Income is 1 of the socio-economic indicators and could directly influence the health outcomes of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The relationship between income and CVD has attracted more and more scholars' attention in the past 20 years.METHODS: To study the current research dynamics of this field, a bibliometric analysis was conducted to evaluate the publications from 1990 to 2018 based on the Science Citation Index Expanded database. By using the Derwent Date Analyzer software, the following aspects were explored: RESULTS:: The USA ranked first in this field, followed by UK and Canada in terms of number of publications. As for institutions, Harvard University took the leading place in the number of publications, as well as the h-index. Plos One had the most publications and "health" was the most frequent used keyword. The leading research area was "public environmental occupational health".
    CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the elderly, the children and the puerpera were the main study population in this field and "disease prevention" was the main study direction. The most concerned health issues in this field were "obesity" and "diet". There might be a lack of articles that explore the associations between income and CVD with a global perspective. Articles on this content are urgently warranted.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000021828
  15. World Neurosurg. 2020 Aug 20. pii: S1878-8750(20)31851-9. [Epub ahead of print]
    Niquen-Jimenez M, Wishart D, Garcia RM, Shlobin NA, Steinle J, Weiss H, Reynolds RA, Lam S, Rosseau G.
      OBJECTIVE: Global neurosurgery is the practice of neurosurgery with the primary purpose of delivering timely, safe, and affordable neurosurgical care to all who need it. The aim of this study is to identify the most frequently cited articles in global neurosurgery through a bibliographic review to characterize articles and trends around this growing topic.METHODS: The top most cited articles in global neurosurgery were determined by searching the Web of Science database using a priori search terms. Articles with at least 5 citations were selected, and there were no time period or language restrictions. The data was extracted from each included article and all characteristics were summarized.
    RESULTS: A total of 932 articles were identified using the search terms, 69 articles fulfilled inclusion criteria and 17 articles were selected that had more than 5 citations. The articles' number of citations ranged from 6 to 98 for the most cited article. Authors from, or affiliated with, fourteen countries contributed to the 17 articles, and the country that had the greatest representation was the United States. The main topic discussed was surgical capacity, the second topic was the treatment of different neurosurgical conditions, and volunteerism was the third topic.
    CONCLUSIONS: There is currently a deficit in both the amount of literature surrounding the topic of global neurosurgery and how much that literature is cited. Developing innovative ways to increase academic productivity within, or in collaboration with, LMICs is essential to contribute to global neurosurgery.
    Keywords:  global neurosurgery; global surgery; neurosurgery
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.08.084
  16. J Neurosurg. 2020 Aug 28. pii: 2020.5.JNS20577. [Epub ahead of print] 1-9
    Behmer Hansen RT, Silva NA, Cuevas R, Cerasiello SY, Richardson AM, Mammis A, Nanda A.
      OBJECTIVE: Current data on fellowship choice and completion by neurosurgical residents are limited, especially in relation to gender, scholarly productivity, and career progression. The objective of this study was to determine gender differences in the selection of fellowship training and subsequent scholarly productivity and career progression.METHODS: The authors conducted a quantitative analysis of the fellowship training information of practicing US academic neurosurgeons. Information was extracted from publicly available websites, the Scopus database, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments website.
    RESULTS: Of 1641 total academic neurosurgeons, 1403 (85.5%) were fellowship trained. There were disproportionately more men (89.9%) compared to women (10.1%). A higher proportion of women completed fellowships than men (p = 0.004). Proportionally, significantly more women completed fellowships in pediatrics (p < 0.0001), neurooncology (p = 0.012), and critical care/trauma (p = 0.001), while significantly more men completed a spine fellowship (p = 0.012). Within those who were fellowship trained, the academic rank of professor was significantly more commonly held by men (p = 0.001), but assistant professor was held significantly more often by women (p = 0.017). The fellowships with the largest mean h-indices were functional/stereotactic, pediatrics, and critical care/trauma. Despite more women completing neurooncology and pediatric fellowships, men had significantly greater h-indices in these subspecialties compared to women. Women had more industry funding awards than men in pediatrics (p < 0.0001), while men had more in spine (p = 0.023).
    CONCLUSIONS: Women were found to have higher rates for fellowship completion compared with their male counterparts, yet had lower scholarly productivity in every subspecialty. Fellowship choice remains unequally distributed between genders, and scholarly productivity and career progression varies between fellowship choice.
    Keywords:  AANS = American Association of Neurological Surgeons; CMS = Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; fellowship training; gender; industry funding; scholarly productivity; women in neurosurgery
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.5.JNS20577
  17. One Health. 2020 Dec;10 100146
    Humboldt-Dachroeden S, Rubin O, Sylvester Frid-Nielsen S.
      There is a growing interest in One Health, reflected by the rising number of publications relating to One Health literature, but also through zoonotic disease outbreaks becoming more frequent, such as Ebola, Zika virus and COVID-19. This paper uses bibliometric analysis to explore the state of One Health in academic literature, to visualise the characteristics and trends within the field through a network analysis of citation patterns and bibliographic links. The analysis focuses on publication trends, co-citation network of scientific journals, co-citation network of authors, and co-occurrence of keywords. The bibliometric analysis showed an increasing interest for One Health in academic research. However, it revealed some thematic and disciplinary shortcomings, in particular with respect to the inclusion of environmental themes and social science insights pertaining to the implementation of One Health policies. The analysis indicated that there is a need for more applicable approaches to strengthen intersectoral collaboration and knowledge sharing. Silos between the disciplines of human medicine, veterinary medicine and environment still persist. Engaging researchers with different expertise and disciplinary backgrounds will facilitate a more comprehensive perspective where the human-animal-environment interface is not researched as separate entities but as a coherent whole. Further, journals dedicated to One Health or interdisciplinary research provide scholars the possibility to publish multifaceted research. These journals are uniquely positioned to bridge between fields, strengthen interdisciplinary research and create room for social science approaches alongside of medical and natural sciences.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric analysis; Implementation; Interdisciplinary studies; Management; Network analysis; One Health
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2020.100146
  18. BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 26. 10(8): e036961
    Samuel M, Batomen B, Rouette J, Kim J, Platt RW, Brophy JM, Kaufman JS.
      BACKGROUND: Propensity score (PS) methods are frequently used in cardiovascular clinical research. Previous evaluations revealed poor reporting of PS methods, however a comprehensive and current evaluation of PS use and reporting is lacking. The objectives of the present survey were to (1) evaluate the quality of PS methods in cardiovascular publications, (2) summarise PS methods and (3) propose key reporting elements for PS publications.METHODS: A PubMed search for cardiovascular PS articles published between 2010 and 2017 in high-impact general medical (top five by impact factor) and cardiovascular (top three by impact factor) journals was performed. Articles were evaluated for the reporting of PS techniques and methods. Data extraction elements were identified from the PS literature and extraction forms were pilot tested.
    RESULTS: Of the 306 PS articles identified, most were published in Journal of the American College of Cardiology (29%; n=88), and Circulation (27%, n=81), followed by European Heart Journal (15%; n=47). PS matching was performed most often, followed by direct adjustment, inverse probability of treatment weighting and stratification. Most studies (77%; n=193) selected variables to include in the PS model a priori. A total of 38% (n=116) of studies did not report standardised mean differences, but instead relied on hypothesis testing. For matching, 92% (n=193) of articles presented the balance of covariates. Overall, interpretations of the effect estimates corresponded to the PS method conducted or described in 49% (n=150) of the reviewed articles.
    DISCUSSION: Although PS methods are frequently used in high-impact medical journals, reporting of methodological details has been inconsistent. Improved reporting of PS results is warranted and these proposals should aid both researchers and consumers in the presentation and interpretation of PS methods.
    Keywords:  cardiac epidemiology; cardiology; epidemiology
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036961
  19. J Surg Educ. 2020 Aug 22. pii: S1931-7204(20)30242-7. [Epub ahead of print]
    Isom CA, Bisgaard EK, Campbell KM, Courtney C, Erickson C, Faber DA, Gauger PG, Greenberg JA, Kassam AF, Mullen JT, Phares A, Quillin RC, Salcedo ES, Schaffer AJ, Scaria D, Stahl CC, Wise PE, Kauffmann RM, Chen X, Smith JJ, Terhune KP.
      OBJECTIVE: To determine whether pursuit of an advanced degree during dedicated research time (DRT) in a general surgery residency training program impacts a resident's research productivity.DESIGN: A retrospective, multi-institutional cohort study.
    SETTING: General surgery residency programs that were approved to graduate more than 5 categorical residents per year and that offered at least 1 year of DRT were contacted for participation in the study. A total of 10 general surgery residency programs agreed to participate in the study.
    PARTICIPANTS: Residents who started their residency between 2000 and 2012 and spent at least one full year in DRT (n = 511) were included. Those who completed an advanced degree were compared on the following parameters to those who did not complete one: total number of papers, first-author papers, the Journal Citation Reports impact factors of publication (2018, or most recent), and first position after residency or fellowship training.
    RESULTS: During DRT, 87 (17%) residents obtained an advanced degree. The most common degree obtained was a Master of Public Health (MPH, n = 42 (48.8%)). Residents who did not obtain an advanced degree during DRT published fewer papers (median 8, [interquartile range 4-12]) than those who obtained a degree (9, [6-17]) (p = 0.002). They also published fewer first author papers (3, [2-6]) vs (5, [2-9]) (p = 0.002) than those who obtained a degree. Resident impact factor (RIF) was calculated using Journal Citation Reports impact factor and author position. Those who did not earn an advanced degree had a lower RIF (adjusted RIF, 84 ± 4 vs 134 ± 5, p < 0.001) compared to those who did. There was no association between obtaining a degree and pursuit of academic surgery (p = 0.13) CONCLUSIONS: Pursuit of an advanced degree during DRT is associated with increased research productivity but is not associated with pursuit of an academic career.
    Keywords:  Research in residency; Residency training; Surgical education
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.07.008
  20. Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2020 Oct;139 110052
    Mohadab ME, Bouikhalene B, Safi S.
      Global scientific production around the Covid-19 pandemic, in the various disciplines on the various international scientific bibliographic databases, has grown exponentially. The latter builds a source of scientific enrichment and an important lever for most researchers around the world, each of its field and its position with an ultimate aim of overcoming this pandemic. In this direction, bibliometric data constitute a fundamental source in the process of evaluation of scientific production in the academic world; bibliometrics provides researchers and institutions with crucial strategic information for the enhancement of their research results with the local and international scientific community, especially in this international pandemic.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric analysis; Bibliometric method; Covid-19; Scientific production; Scientific research
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110052
  21. J Bus Res. 2020 Sep;118 253-261
    Verma S, Gustafsson A.
      The COVID-19 pandemic has been labeled as a black swan event that caused a ripple effect on every aspect of human life. Despite the short time span of the pandemic-only four and half months so far-a rather large volume of research pertaining to COVID-19 has been published (107 articles indexed in Scopus and the Web of Science). This article presents the findings of a bibliometric study of COVID-19 literature in the business and management domain to identify current areas of research and propose a way forward. The analysis of the published literature identified four main research themes and 18 sub-themes. The findings and propositions of this study suggest that COVID-19 will be the catalyst of several long- and short-term policy changes and requires the theoretical and empirical attention of researchers. The offered propositions will act as a roadmap to potential research opportunities.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric analysis; Business & management; COVID-19; Co-word analysis; Emerging research topics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.057
  22. Scientometrics. 2020 Jun 17. 1-31
    Fang Z, Costas R, Tian W, Wang X, Wouters P.
      Sufficient data presence is one of the key preconditions for applying metrics in practice. Based on both Altmetric.com data and Mendeley data collected up to 2019, this paper presents a state-of-the-art analysis of the presence of 12 kinds of altmetric events for nearly 12.3 million Web of Science publications published between 2012 and 2018. Results show that even though an upward trend of data presence can be observed over time, except for Mendeley readers and Twitter mentions, the overall presence of most altmetric data is still low. The majority of altmetric events go to publications in the fields of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities, and Life and Earth Sciences. As to research topics, the level of attention received by research topics varies across altmetric data, and specific altmetric data show different preferences for research topics, on the basis of which a framework for identifying hot research topics is proposed and applied to detect research topics with higher levels of attention garnered on certain altmetric data source. Twitter mentions and policy document citations were selected as two examples to identify hot research topics of interest of Twitter users and policy-makers, respectively, shedding light on the potential of altmetric data in monitoring research trends of specific social attention.
    Keywords:  Altmetrics; Data coverage; Data intensity; Hot topics; Social attention; Social media metrics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03564-9
  23. Neurol India. 2020 Jul-Aug;68(4):68(4): 741-759
    Tariq MB, Wu OC, Agulnick MA, Kasliwal MK.
      Background: Traumatic injury to the spine can be a complex diagnostic and therapeutic entity often with devastating consequences. Outside of the isolated vertebral column injury costs; annual costs associated with spinal cord injury (SCI) are estimated to exceed $9.7 billion.Objective: To identify the 100 most-cited articles on spine trauma.
    Methods: The Thomson Reuters Web of Science citation indexing service was queried. The articles were sorted by times cited in descending order. Two independent reviewers reviewed the article titles and abstracts to identify the top 100 most-cited articles.
    Results: The top 100 articles were found to be cited between 108 (articles #99-100) and 1595 times (article #1). The most-cited basic science article was cited 340 times (#12 on the top 100 list). The oldest article on the top 100 list was from 1953 and most recent from 2012. The number of patients, when applicable, in a study ranged from 9 (article #34) to 34,069 (article #5). Top 100 articles were published in 41 different journals with a wide range of specialities and fields most commonly multidisciplinary. Basic science research encompassed 34 of the 100 articles on the list.
    Conclusions: We present the 100 most-cited articles in spinal trauma with emphases on important contributions from both basic science and clinical research across a wide range of authors, specialties, patient populations, and countries. Recognizing some of the most important contributions in the field of spinal trauma may provide insight and guide future work.
    Keywords:  Acute spine injury; acute vertebral fracture; spinal cord 2 injury; spinal injury; spine; spine trauma; trauma
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.4103/0028-3886.293470
  24. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020 Jul 01. 108(3): 389-397
    Theis-Mahon NR, Bakker CJ.
      Objective: Publications are retracted for many reasons, but the continued use and citation of retracted publications presents a problem for future research. This study investigated retractions in the dental literature to understand the characteristics of retracted publications, the reasons for their retractions, and the nature and context of their citations after retraction.Methods: In September 2018, the authors identified retracted dentistry publications using the Retraction Watch database. Citations to those publications were retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science. Characteristics of retracted publications and their citations were collected, including study design, reasons for retraction, and nature of citation (positive, negative, or neutral). We used chi-square tests to determine if there were notable differences between retracted publications that were cited following retraction and those that were not, and if there were relationships between the nature of the citation, the study design of the original publication, and its reason for retraction.
    Results: Of the 136 retracted publications, 84 were cited after retraction. When restricted to English language, 81 retracted publications received citations from 685 publications. Only 5.4% of the citations noted the retracted status of the original publication, while 25.3% of citations were neutral and 69.3% were positive. Animal studies were more likely to be uncited after retraction, while in vitro studies and randomized controlled trials were more likely to be cited. Retracted publications that were cited negatively were more likely to have been retracted due to scientific distortion than those that were cited positively or neutrally. Retracted publications that were cited negatively were also more likely to be observational studies than those cited positively or neutrally.
    Conclusion: Retracted publications in dentistry are continually cited positively following their retraction, regardless of their study designs or reasons for retraction. This indicates that the continued citation of retracted publications in this field cannot be isolated to certain research methods or misconduct but is, instead, a more widespread issue.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2020.824
  25. Scientometrics. 2020 Jul 18. 1-16
    Goh YC, Cai XQ, Theseira W, Ko G, Khor KA.
      We study whether humans or machine learning (ML) classification models are better at classifying scientific research abstracts according to a fixed set of discipline groups. We recruit both undergraduate and postgraduate assistants for this task in separate stages, and compare their performance against the support vectors machine ML algorithm at classifying European Research Council Starting Grant project abstracts to their actual evaluation panels, which are organised by discipline groups. On average, ML is more accurate than human classifiers, across a variety of training and test datasets, and across evaluation panels. ML classifiers trained on different training sets are also more reliable than human classifiers, meaning that different ML classifiers are more consistent in assigning the same classifications to any given abstract, compared to different human classifiers. While the top five percentile of human classifiers can outperform ML in limited cases, selection and training of such classifiers is likely costly and difficult compared to training ML models. Our results suggest ML models are a cost effective and highly accurate method for addressing problems in comparative bibliometric analysis, such as harmonising the discipline classifications of research from different funding agencies or countries.
    Keywords:  Discipline classification; Supervised classification; Text classification
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03614-2
  26. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2020 Aug 14. 1-10
    Shamsi A, Mansourzadeh MJ, Ghazbani A, Khalagi K, Fahimfar N, Ostovar A.
      Background: Iran is fighting heroically against COVID-19. Due to the importance of scientific publications in better dealing with this stubborn virus, this study was conducted aiming at reviewing COVID-19 publications by Iranian scientists.Methods: We searched for COVID-19 and all its related keywords in the Web of Science (WOS), Scopus and PubMed databases to find documents published by Iranian authors until July 10, 2020. Duplicates documents were excluded, and bibliographic parameters were evaluated. Co-authorship matrix was calculated using Bibexcel, and visualizations were done using VOSviewer.
    Results: A total of 849 documents from 3450 Iranian researchers (5.5 authors per document) were retrieved from WOS, PubMed, and Scopus and Iran ranked 12th and 13th in WOS and Scopus in terms of the number of publications. The average citation per document was 2.2 with the h-index of 18. Original articles and letters were the most common formats for Iranian publications. The Journal of Military Medicine has published the highest number of documents. Iranian authors have mostly collaborated with researchers from the United States, Italy, the UK, and Canada, respectively. The co-occurrence network for keywords represented five publication clusters in the collection, and the largest clusters were related to epidemiological studies and public health, followed by clinical studies on COVID-19.
    Conclusion: Iranian researchers have had a significant scientific contribution in various areas of the disease. However, the network of studies has not been sufficiently cohesive, and more coherent collaboration between researchers at the national and international levels should be on the agenda of research policymakers in the country.
    Keywords:  Bibliometrics; COVID-19; Coronavirus; Iran; Publications; SARS-CoV-2
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40200-020-00606-0
  27. Am J Surg. 2020 Aug 15. pii: S0002-9610(20)30501-8. [Epub ahead of print]
    Becerra AZ, Aquina CT, Hayden DM, Torquati AF.
      
    Keywords:  Bibliometrics; Citations
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.07.037
  28. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020 Aug 25.
    Le R, Anderson A, Chalmers CE, Scolaro JA, Lee YP, Bhatia N.
      INTRODUCTION: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Annual Meeting provides an opportunity for clinicians to attain the most recent advancements in the orthopaedic field. However, the most recent study analyzing publication rates from the 2001 Annual Meeting determined that only 49% of the podium and poster abstracts were eventually published. The purpose of this study was to determine the publication rate, likelihood of publication based on the presentation format, and time to publication for abstracts presented at the 2014 to 2017 AAOS Annual Meetings.METHODS: We did a comprehensive search of PubMed and Google Scholar to determine whether abstracts presented in the podium, poster, and scientific exhibit formats from the 2014 to 2017 AAOS Annual Meetings were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Abstract title, authors, and keywords were used to query for publication status and date of publication.
    RESULTS: We analyzed 5,902 abstracts from the 2014 to 2017 AAOS Annual Meetings. The overall publication rate for podium and poster presentations was 69.9%, with individual publication rates at 73.0% and 65.1%, respectively. A higher likelihood of publication in the podium format was noted with odds ratio 1.45 (P < 0.0001). Scientific exhibits displayed a publication rate of 46.9%. Most publications in all formats occurred within 2 years.
    CONCLUSION: A large increase was noted in the quality of research being presented at the AAOS Annual Meeting. With 69.9% of podium and poster presentations from the 2014 to 2017 Annual Meetings being published in a peer-reviewed journal, clinicians can use the data presented as an up-to-date, adjunct source of guidance for their clinical practices.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-00501
  29. Biomed Res Int. 2020 ;2020 3468303
    Lorusso F, Inchingolo F, Scarano A.
      Background: The academic scientific research in the field of dentistry has rapidly increased in the last 20 years under the pressure of the multidisciplinary technological advancements and the growing demand for new predictable and cost-effective techniques and materials. The aim of the present investigation was to analyze the academic scientific production conducted by Italian Academies and Dental Schools.Methods: The list of MED/28 academic researchers, associate and full professors, and academic affiliations was collected from the national database of CINECA to evaluate the scientific output of the Italian Universities. The complete list of scientific contributions and the bibliometric parameters were recorded in the Scopus database.
    Results: The scientific production of 37 Italian Universities, 416 researchers, and 23689 papers was evaluated. The measurement of total academic papers, citations, h-index, and relative citation ratio (RCR) was calculated. The study data showed an increase of the academic scientific production over the last 5 years.
    Conclusions: The results presented show how scientific research is increasingly pursued by dental clinicians.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3468303
  30. Scientometrics. 2020 Jun 25. 1-15
    Homolak J, Kodvanj I, Virag D.
      The Pandemic of COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 motivated the scientific community to work together in order to gather, organize, process and distribute data on the novel biomedical hazard. Here, we analyzed how the scientific community responded to this challenge by quantifying distribution and availability patterns of the academic information related to COVID-19. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of the information flow and scientific collaboration, two factors we believe to be critical for finding new solutions for the ongoing pandemic. The RISmed R package, and a custom Python script were used to fetch metadata on articles indexed in PubMed and published on Rxiv preprint server. Scopus was manually searched and the metadata was exported in BibTex file. Publication rate and publication status, affiliation and author count per article, and submission-to-publication time were analysed in R. Biblioshiny application was used to create a world collaboration map. Preliminary data suggest that COVID-19 pandemic resulted in generation of a large amount of scientific data, and demonstrates potential problems regarding the information velocity, availability, and scientific collaboration in the early stages of the pandemic. More specifically, the results indicate precarious overload of the standard publication systems, significant problems with data availability and apparent deficient collaboration. In conclusion, we believe the scientific community could have used the data more efficiently in order to create proper foundations for finding new solutions for the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, we believe we can learn from this on the go and adopt open science principles and a more mindful approach to COVID-19-related data to accelerate the discovery of more efficient solutions. We take this opportunity to invite our colleagues to contribute to this global scientific collaboration by publishing their findings with maximal transparency.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric; COVID-19; Data; Open science; Pandemic
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03587-2
  31. J Vis (Tokyo). 2020 Aug 16. 1-16
    Zeng W, Dong A, Chen X, Cheng ZL.
      Abstract: Many visual analytics have been developed for examining scientific publications comprising wealthy data such as authors and citations. The studies provide unprecedented insights on a variety of applications, e.g., literature review and collaboration analysis. However, visual information (e.g., figures) that is widely employed for storytelling and methods description are often neglected. We present VIStory, an interactive storyboard for exploring visual information in scientific publications. We harvest a new dataset of a large corpora of figures, using an automatic figure extraction method. Each figure contains various attributes such as dominant color and width/height ratio, together with faceted metadata of the publication including venues, authors, and keywords. To depict these information, we develop an intuitive interface consisting of three components: (1) Faceted View enables efficient query by publication metadata, benefiting from a nested table structure, (2) Storyboard View arranges paper rings-a well-designed glyph for depicting figure attributes, in a themeriver layout to reveal temporal trends, and (3) Endgame View presents a highlighted figure together with the publication metadata. We illustrate the applicability of VIStory with case studies on two datasets, i.e., 10-year IEEE VIS publications, and publications by a research team at CVPR, ICCV, and ECCV conferences. Quantitative and qualitative results from a formal user study demonstrate the efficiency of VIStory in exploring visual information in scientific publications.Graphical abstract:
    Keywords:  Document visualization; Faceted metadata; Image browser
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12650-020-00688-1
  32. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020 Jul 01. 108(3): 364-377
    Myers B.
      Objective: This study seeks to gain initial insight into what is talked about and whose voices are heard at Medical Library Association (MLA) annual meetings.Methods: Meeting abstracts were downloaded from the MLA website and converted to comma-separated values (CSV) format. Descriptive analysis in Python identified the number of presentations, disambiguated authors, author collaboration, institutional affiliation type, and geographic affiliation. Topics were generated using Mallet's Latent Dirichlet Allocation algorithm for topic modeling.
    Results: There were 5,781 presentations at MLA annual meetings from 2001-2019. Author disambiguation resulted in approximately 5,680 unique authors. One thousand ninety-three records included a hospital-related keyword in the author field, and 4,517 records included an academic-related keyword. There were 438 presentations with at least 1 international author. The topic model identified 16 topics in the MLA abstract corpus: events, electronic resources, publications, evidence-based practice, collections, academic instruction, librarian roles and relationships, technical systems, special collections, general instruction, literature searching, surveys, research support, community outreach, patient education, and library services.
    Conclusions: Academic librarians presented more frequently than hospital librarians, though more research should be done to determine if this discrepancy was disproportionate to hospital librarians' representation in MLA. Geographic affiliation was concentrated in the United States and appeared to be related to population density. Health sciences librarians in the early twenty-first century are spending more time at MLA annual meetings talking about communities, relationships, and visible services, and less time talking about library collections and operations. Further research will be needed to boost the participation of underrepresented members.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2020.836
  33. Implement Sci. 2020 Aug 27. 15(1): 68
    Bergström A, Ehrenberg A, Eldh AC, Graham ID, Gustafsson K, Harvey G, Hunter S, Kitson A, Rycroft-Malone J, Wallin L.
      BACKGROUND: The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework was developed two decades ago and conceptualizes successful implementation (SI) as a function (f) of the evidence (E) nature and type, context (C) quality, and the facilitation (F), [SI = f (E,C,F)]. Despite a growing number of citations of theoretical frameworks including PARIHS, details of how theoretical frameworks are used remains largely unknown. This review aimed to enhance the understanding of the breadth and depth of the use of the PARIHS framework.METHODS: This citation analysis commenced from four core articles representing the key stages of the framework's development. The citation search was performed in Web of Science and Scopus. After exclusion, we undertook an initial assessment aimed to identify articles using PARIHS and not only referencing any of the core articles. To assess this, all articles were read in full. Further data extraction included capturing information about where (country/countries and setting/s) PARIHS had been used, as well as categorizing how the framework was applied. Also, strengths and weaknesses, as well as efforts to validate the framework, were explored in detail.
    RESULTS: The citation search yielded 1613 articles. After applying exclusion criteria, 1475 articles were read in full, and the initial assessment yielded a total of 367 articles reported to have used the PARIHS framework. These articles were included for data extraction. The framework had been used in a variety of settings and in both high-, middle-, and low-income countries. With regard to types of use, 32% used PARIHS in planning and delivering an intervention, 50% in data analysis, 55% in the evaluation of study findings, and/or 37% in any other way. Further analysis showed that its actual application was frequently partial and generally not well elaborated.
    CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous citation analysis of the use of theoretical frameworks in implementation science, we also found a rather superficial description of the use of PARIHS. Thus, we propose the development and adoption of reporting guidelines on how framework(s) are used in implementation studies, with the expectation that this will enhance the maturity of implementation science.
    Keywords:  Citation analysis; Implementation science; Knowledge translation; PARIHS framework
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01003-0
  34. Scientometrics. 2020 Jun 09. 1-27
    Zhang L, Zhao W, Sun B, Huang Y, Glänzel W.
      As of the middle of April 2020, the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic has claimed more than 137,000 lives (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html). Because of its extremely fast spreading, the attention of the global scientific community is now focusing on slowing down, containing and finally stopping the spread of this disease. This requires the concerted action of researchers and practitioners of many related fields, raising, as always in such situations the question, of what kind of research has to be conducted, what are the priorities, how has research to be coordinated and who needs to be involved. In other words, what are the characteristics of the response of the global research community on the challenge? In the present paper, we attempt to characterise, quantify and measure the response of academia to international public health emergencies in a comparative bibliometric study of multiple outbreaks. In addition, we provide a preliminary review of the global research effort regarding the defeat of the COVID-19 pandemic. From our analysis of six infectious disease outbreaks since 2000, including COVID-19, we find that academia always responded quickly to public health emergencies with a sharp increase in the number of publications immediately following the declaration of an outbreak by the WHO. In general, countries/regions place emphasis on epidemics in their own region, but Europe and North America are also concerned with outbreaks in other, developed and less developed areas through conducting intensive collaborative research with the core countries/regions of the outbreak, such as in the case of Ebola in Africa. Researches in the fields of virology, infectious diseases and immunology are the most active, and we identified two characteristic patterns in global science distinguishing research in Europe and America that is more focused on public health from that conducted in China and Japan with more emphasis on biomedical research and clinical pharmacy, respectively. Universities contribute slightly less than half to the global research output, and the vast majority of research funding originates from the public sector. Our findings on how academia responds to emergencies could be beneficial to decision-makers in research and health policy in creating and adjusting anti-epidemic/-pandemic strategies.
    Keywords:  Bibliometrics; COVID-19; PHEIC; Response pattern; Scientometrics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03531-4
  35. F1000Res. 2020;9:9 649
    Arrizabalaga O, Otaegui D, Vergara I, Arrizabalaga J, Méndez E.
      Background: The COVID-19 outbreak has made funders, researchers and publishers agree to have research publications, as well as other research outputs, such as data, become openly available. In this extraordinary research context of the SARS CoV-2 pandemic, publishers are announcing that their coronavirus-related articles will be made immediately accessible in appropriate open repositories, like PubMed Central, agreeing upon funders' and researchers' instigation. Methods: This work uses Unpaywall, OpenRefine and PubMed to analyse the level of openness of articles about COVID-19, published during the first quarter of 2020. It also analyses Open Access (OA) articles published about previous coronavirus (SARS CoV-1 and MERS CoV) as a means of comparison. Results: A total of 5,611 COVID-19-related articles were analysed from PubMed. This is a much higher amount for a period of 4 months compared to those found for SARS CoV-1 and MERS during the first year of their first outbreaks (335 and 116 articles, respectively).  Regarding the levels of openness, 88.8% of the SARS CoV-2 papers are freely available; similar rates were found for the other coronaviruses. Deeper analysis showed that (i) 67.4% of articles belong to an undefined Bronze category; (ii) 76.4% of all OA papers don't carry any license, followed by 10.4% which display restricted licensing. These patterns were found to be repeated in the three most frequent publishers: Elsevier, Springer and Wiley. Conclusions: Our results suggest that, although scientific production is much higher than during previous epidemics and is open, there is a caveat to this opening, characterized by the absence of fundamental elements and values ​​on which Open Science is based, such as licensing.
    Keywords:  COVID-19; OA analysis.; Open Access; Pandemic; PubMed; Publishing; Scholarly communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.24136.1
  36. Nature. 2020 Aug 24.
    Viglione G.
      
    Keywords:  Culture; Environmental sciences; Research management; Scientific community; Society
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02328-y
  37. Can J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug 22. pii: S0008-4182(20)30684-0. [Epub ahead of print]
    Nyamai LA, Jin YP, Mathew DJ, Dharia RS, Trope GE, Buys YM.
      OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of indexed ophthalmology journals with article processing charges (APCs) and potential factors associated with APCs.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
    PARTICIPANTS: Web of Science-indexed Ophthalmology journals in 2019.
    METHODS: Indexed ophthalmology journal web sites were reviewed to obtain information on APCs, impact factor (IF), publication mode, publisher type, journal affiliation, waiver discount, and continent of origin. For data unavailable on the web site, the journal was contacted. Journal publication mode was categorized into subscription, fully open access, and hybrid (open access and subscription combined). Linear regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between APCs and the above variables.
    MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportion of ophthalmology journals with APCs.
    RESULTS: 59 indexed ophthalmology journals were identified; 3 (5.1%) subscription only, 10 (16.9%) open access, and 46 (78.0%) hybrid. Overall 52/59 (88.1%) journals had APCs; 10 of 59 journals (16.9%) required APCs for publication (7 fully open access and 3 hybrid journals), whereas 42/59 (71.2%, all hybrid journals) had optional APCs for open access. The 7/59 journals (11.9%) without APCs included 100% (3/3) of the subscription-only journals, 30% (3/10) of the open access, and 2% (1/46) of the hybrid journals. The mean cost for journals with APCs was US$2854 ± 708.9 (range US$490-5000). Higher IF, publication mode, and commercial publishers were associated with higher APCs.
    CONCLUSIONS: 16.9% of indexed ophthalmology journals in 2019 required APCs, and additional 71.2% hybrid journals had APCs for the option of open access. Independent predictors of APCs were IF and publication mode.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2020.06.023
  38. Br J Dermatol. 2020 Aug 28.
    Finlay AY.
      By reading an academic journal, you are already at high-risk of publishing addiction (PA). So read on and see if you have it. PA is proposed as a previously unreported behavioural addiction. Gambling, excessive smartphone use and unrestrained shopping are other behavioural "addictions".1,2 Although widespread, PA is masked by its normalisation within academia, as alcoholism may be accepted in a brewery. PA can greatly impact the lives of those in its grip.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.19500
  39. Int J Adv Couns. 2020 Jul 16. 1-15
    Woo H, Dondanville A, Jang H, Na G, Jang Y.
      This content analysis provides an overview of articles specific to technology integration in the field of counseling published in American Counseling Association (ACA) journals between the years 2000 and 2018. In addition to the number of articles on this topic published during this time period, the study identified other aspects such as authors and institutional affiliations; methodology, study locations, and application settings; target populations and sample characteristics; and areas and types of technology integration. Recommendations are provided for counseling research in general and for future research extending from specific circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Keywords:  Content analysis; Counseling; Counseling journals; Technology
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-020-09406-w
  40. Data Brief. 2020 Aug 19. 106178
    Santos BS, Silva I, Ribeiro-Dantas MDC, Alves G, Endo PT, Lima L.
      COVID-2019 has been recognized as a global threat, and several studies are being conducted in order to contribute to the fight and prevention of this pandemic. This work presents a scholarly production dataset focused on COVID-19, providing an overview of scientific research activities, making it possible to identify countries, scientists and research groups most active in this task force to combat the coronavirus disease. The dataset is composed of 40,212 records of articles' metadata collected from Scopus, PubMed, arXiv and bioRxiv databases from January 2019 to July 2020. Those data were extracted by using the techniques of Python Web Scraping and preprocessed with Pandas Data Wrangling. In addition, the pipeline to preprocess and generate the dataset are versioned with the Data Version Control tool (DVC) and are thus easily reproducible and auditable.
    Keywords:  Bibliometrics; COVID-19; Data Science; Pandemic; SARS-CoV-2; Scientometrics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.106178