Pattern and determinants of HIV research productivity in sub-Saharan Africa: bibliometric analysis of 1981 to 2009 PubMed papers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several bibliometric studies have been published on AIDS. The findings obtained from these studies have provided a general picture of the history and growth of AIDS literature. However, factors related to variation in HIV research productivity in sub-Saharan Africa have not been examined. Therefore, this study aims to fill some of the gap in existing research to provide insights into factors associated with HIV research productivity in sub-Saharan Africa.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A bibliometric analysis regarding sub-Saharan Africa HIV/AIDS research was conducted in the PubMed database for the period of 1981 to 2009. The numbers of HIV research articles indexed in PubMed was used as surrogate for total HIV research productivity. Series of univariable and multivariable negative binomial regression models were used to explore factors associated with variation in HIV research productivity in sub-Saharan Africa.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>First authors from South Africa, Uganda and Kenya contributed almost half of the total number of HIV articles indexed in PubMed between 1981 and 2009. Uganda, Zimbabwe and Malawi had better records when the total production was adjusted for gross domestic product (GDP). Comoros, the Gambia and Guinea-Bissau were the most productive countries when the total products were normalized by number of people with HIV. There were strong positive and statistically significant correlation between countries number of indexed journal (Pearson correlation r = 0.77, p = .001), number of higher institutions (r = 0.60, p = .001), number of physicians (r = 0.83, p = .001) and absolute numbers of HIV articles.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>HIV research productivity in Africa is highly skewed. To increase HIV research output, total expenditure on health (% of GDP), private expenditure on health, and adult literacy rate may be important factors to address.</p

Evaluating Research and Impact: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research by the NIH/NIAID HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks

Evaluative bibliometrics uses advanced techniques to assess the impact of scholarly work in the context of other scientific work and usually compares the relative scientific contributions of research groups or institutions. Using publications from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) HIV/AIDS extramural clinical trials networks, we assessed the presence, performance, and impact of papers published in 2006–2008. Through this approach, we sought to expand traditional bibliometric analyses beyond citation counts to include normative comparisons across journals and fields, visualization of co-authorship across the networks, and assess the inclusion of publications in reviews and syntheses. Specifically, we examined the research output of the networks in terms of the a) presence of papers in the scientific journal hierarchy ranked on the basis of journal influence measures, b) performance of publications on traditional bibliometric measures, and c) impact of publications in comparisons with similar publications worldwide, adjusted for journals and fields. We also examined collaboration and interdisciplinarity across the initiative, through network analysis and modeling of co-authorship patterns. Finally, we explored the uptake of network produced publications in research reviews and syntheses. Overall, the results suggest the networks are producing highly recognized work, engaging in extensive interdisciplinary collaborations, and having an impact across several areas of HIV-related science. The strengths and limitations of the approach for evaluation and monitoring research initiatives are discussed

Trends in scientific activity addressing transmissible spongiform encephalopathies: a bibliometric study covering the period 1973–2002

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this study is to analyse the trends in scientific research on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies by applying bibliometric tools to the scientific literature published between 1973 and 2002.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The data for the study were obtained from Medline database, in order to determine the volume of scientific output in the above period, the countries involved, the type of document and the trends in the subject matters addressed. The period 1973–2002 was divided in three sub-periods.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We observed a significant growth in scientific production. The percentage of increase is 871.7 from 1973 to 2002. This is more evident since 1991 and particularly in the 1996–2001 period. The countries found to have the highest output were the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, France and Germany. The evolution in the subject matters was almost constant in the three sub-periods in which the study was divided. In the first and second sub-periods, the subject matters of greatest interest were more general, i.e Nervous system or Nervous system diseases, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Scrapie, and Chemicals and Drugs, but in the last sub-period, some changes were observed because the Prion-related matters had the greatest presence.</p> <p>Collaboration among authors is small from 1973 to 1992, but increases notably in the third sub-period, and also the number of authors and clusters formed. Some of the authors, like Gajdusek or Prusiner, appear in the whole period.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The study reveals a very high increase in scientific production. It is related also with the beginnings of research on bovine spongiform encephalopathy and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, with the establishment of progressive collaboration relationships and a reflection of public health concerns about this problem.</p