Classic Papers in Critical Care: A Bibliometric Analysis

Purpose- This study aimed to identify and analyze the bibliometric characteristics of the classic papers in the field of critical care. Design/methodology/approach- In this bibliometric overview, Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science were used for data collection. Study sample consisted of the classic papers in the field of critical care, introduced in Google scholar. SPSS were used for data analyses. Findings- Critical Care ranked the first journal in having critical care classic papers. All critical care classic papers were multi-authored. The most highly-cited paper was a paper titled Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU , with 3796 received citations in Google Scholar. The United States was the top contributing country. There was a significantly positive correlation between the citations of critical care classic papers in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science (r= .988, p\u3c.001). Practical implications- The bibliometric overview of critical care classic papers can be beneficial to the researchers and specialists in the field as well as to the editorial teams of its related journals. Bibliometricians and library and information specialist can use the findings of the study. Originality/value- This study is the first to analyze the classic papers in critical care field from a bibliometric perspective

Classic Papers in Critical Care: A Bibliometric Analysis

Purpose- This study aimed to identify and analyze the bibliometric characteristics of the classic papers in the field of critical care. Design/methodology/approach- In this bibliometric overview, Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science were used for data collection. Study sample consisted of the classic papers in the field of critical care, introduced in Google scholar. SPSS were used for data analyses. Findings- Critical Care ranked the first journal in having critical care classic papers. All critical care classic papers were multi-authored. The most highly-cited paper was a paper titled Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU , with 3796 received citations in Google Scholar. The United States was the top contributing country. There was a significantly positive correlation between the citations of critical care classic papers in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science (r= .988, p\u3c.001). Practical implications- The bibliometric overview of critical care classic papers can be beneficial to the researchers and specialists in the field as well as to the editorial teams of its related journals. Bibliometricians and library and information specialist can use the findings of the study. Originality/value- This study is the first to analyze the classic papers in critical care field from a bibliometric perspective

A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of the Scientific Publications of Universities: A Study of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences during 1992-2018

The evaluation of universities from different perspectives is important for their scientific development. Analyzing the scientific papers of a university under the bibliometric approach is one main evaluative approach. The aim of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis and visualization of papers published by Hamadan University of Medical Science (HUMS), Iran, during 1992-2018. This study used bibliometric and visualization techniques. Scopus database was used for data collection. 3753 papers were retrieved by applying Affiliation Search in Scopus advanced search section. Excel and VOSviewer software packages were used for data analysis and bibliometric indicator extraction. An increasing trend was seen in the numbers of HUMS's published papers and received citations. The highest rate of collaboration in national level was with Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Internationally, HUMS's researchers had the highest collaboration with the authors from the United States, the United Kingdom and Switzerland, respectively. All highly-cited papers were published in high level Q1 journals. Term clustering demonstrated four main clusters: epidemiological studies, laboratory studies, pharmacological studies, and microbiological studies. The results of this study can be beneficial to the policy-makers of this university. In addition, researchers and bibliometricians can use this study as a pattern for studying and visualizing the bibliometric indicators of other universities and research institutions

Iranian Authors\u27 Contributions to the Library Philosophy and Practice

Objective: This study aimed to conduct a bibliometric analysis and scientific visualization of the contribution made by Iranians\u27 authors in the Library Philosophy and Practice (LPP) from 2006 to 2019. Material and Methods: This bibliometric analysis used Scopus database for retrieving data on all papers published by Iranians in LPP during the study time span. VOSviewer and Microsoft Excel software packages were used for data analysis. Findings: Out of 139 papers authored by Iranians in LPP, the first published paper belonged to 2006. An increasing trend can be seen in annual publication number, with 1 and 64 papers in 2007 and 2019, respectively. The first ranked active author was Khasseh A.A. with 9 papers. Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences and Payame Noor University were in the top of the contributing institutes, each with authoring 20 papers followed by Islamic Azad University, Central with 13 papers. Iranian more collaborated with Indians. The mean rate of received citations per paper was 0.62. The top three highly-cited authors were Isfandyiari-Moghaddam, A. (with 13), Khasseh A.A. and Saberi M.K. (each with 11) and Biranvand (with 10), respectively. Citing some known journals in their papers, Iranian researchers considered main topics in LIS field, including bibliometrics, altmetrics and library management and technologies. Conclusion: This study is a relatively comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Iranians\u27 contributions to LPP. The result can be helpful as a road map for researchers and readers countrywide as well as the editorial team of the journal

Top Ten Journals Publishing on COVID-19: A Scientometric Analysis

Objectives: This study aimed at identifying and visualizing the scientometric indicators of top ten highly productive journals publishing documents on topics related to COVID-19. Methods: on April 4, 2021, using 36 COVID-19 keywords derived from MeSH retrieved all relevant global publications indexed in Scopus. Then, all studies were limited to top 10 highly productive journals in this field. An Exploratory and descriptive analysis of bibliographic data (number of publication/citations, journals, highly cited documents, highly cited/productive authors/countries, co-occurrence map of keywords, and co-citation map of sources) by using Microsoft Excel and VOSviewer software packages were performed. Results: The top ranked journals in publication numbers belonged to the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (N=1304, 16.2%), Plos One (N=1158, 14.4%) and BMJ (997, 12.4%), respectively. The Lancet (N=69983), JAMA (N=42553) and the Journal of Medical Virology (19089) ranked first to third as to received citation numbers, respectively. Mahase, E (N=180, 2.23%), Lacobucci, G (N=126, 1.56%) and Rimmer, A (N=82, 1.01%) were ranked first to third as highly-productive authors, respectively. However, the highest-ranked authors in their citations/document indicator were Cheng, Z (3691), Gu, X (2736.25) and Xia, J (2269.66), respectively. First to third ranked countries in receiving citations were China (94776), United States (51621) and United Kingdom (32339), respectively.  Out of top 10 contributing countries in producing documents, United States (1976; 24.5%), United Kingdom (1372; 17%) and China (894; 11.1%) ranked first to third, respectively. Keywords co-occurrence and clustering showed that clinical manifestation and dissemination of the disease as well as its epidemiology have been heavily considered.  Discussion: This study offers important quantitative information on journals working on the disease. Identifying most productive journals can help potential researchers collaborate with researchers from pioneering journals and contribute to top journals for making influential works on COVID-19 and consequent knowledge on the control and treatment of the disease

The Online Attention to Otorhinolaryngology Research: An Altmetric Analysis (1967-2021)

Background: As a new approach and complementary to traditional bibliometrics, altmetrics measures the influence of scientific research in social media tools and applications. Aim: This study aimed at comprehensively analyzing research output in otorhinolaryngology research from its beginning in 1967 to 2021. Methods: Using Scimago Journal Ranking (SJR), 107 otorhinolaryngology journals were retrieved. Of them, 84 journals with their 89044 papers as well as their altmetric scores were extracted from the Altmetric Explorer in 28 February 2022. The citation rates of the top ten papers having high altmetric scores were retrieved from Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science and Dimensions. Data were analyzed in excel. Results: 67,529 otorhinolaryngology papers (75%) were mentioned 2,901,187 times in 17 different social media tools. The highest altmetric score of papers amounted to 3,989. The top-ranked media were Nendeley and Twitter, respectively. The USA was the first ranked country in Twitter and Facebook and the UK was such in News Outlet and Policy. The highest mentioned journal was JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery. The top affiliation in sharing papers was Harvard University with 1621 shared papers. All of the top 10 papers in altmetric scores were multi-authored original research articles.. Conclusion: As one of the first altmetric studies in otorhinolaryngology field, this study provided helpful information for potential authors, researchers, research institutes and journals in the field in increasing the reach and influence of their researches

Co-authorship Networks of Iranian Researchers' Publications on the Field of Management during a Half-Century (1969-2018)

As one of the main bibliometric concepts, co-authorship has been thoughtfully considered in recent years. Despite many bibliometric studies on the co-authorship in different scientific fields and worldwide countries/regions, Iranian researchers' collaboration in the management field has not been studied. This study aimed to investigate the co-authorship networks in the management papers contributed by Iranian researchers indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) during the recent half-century (years, 1969-2018). Bibliometric data on 5414 papers were extracted from WoS and analyzed in Excel, UCINET, and VOSviewer to measure bibliometric indicators, the map needed co-authorship networks, and depict time-based maps and keyword clustering. Findings showed that co-authored papers increased from two items in 1973 to 721 items in 2018. Expert Systems with Applications, African Journal of Business Management, and International Journal of Production Research were ranked first to third in co-authored papers. Top 20 authors published about 17% of papers (946). Islamic Azad University, University of Tehran, and the Amirkabir University of Technology ranked first to third. Most co-authorship frequencies were made from 2012 to 2014. The first to third ranks of collaborating countries were the USA, Canada, and England. Six main keyword clusters were formed, including main topics in the field. In conclusion, Iranian researchers increasingly co-authored in management, especially during the last decade, and published in various journals that some top ones are prestigious journals. However, some gaps need to be bridged by the low contribution of research institutes and universities countrywide and the limited number of authors with high productivity and low collaboration with neighbor countries and influential universities worldwide.https://dorl.net/dor/ 20.1001.1.20088302.2022.20.1.19.

Exploring Global Trends in Otorhinolaryngology Research Output

Background: As an interdisciplinary field, bibliometrics analyses research publications in scientific fields. As a developing medical field, otorhinolaryngology needs to be evaluated from a bibliometric perspective. Aim: This evaluative bibliometric study aimed at analyzing and exploring global research trends in otorhinolaryngology from the beginning to year 2021. Methods: All papers published in otorhinolaryngology field that indexed in Web of Science (WoS) from 1976-2021 were extracted for analysis by conducting a certain search strategy in advanced search section within category of otorhinolaryngology in the WoS. Data were analyzed by Excel and VOSviewer for measuring bibliometric indicators and depicting visualization maps. Results: 217,027 papers were published during the studied time span. The papers increased from two items in the beginning in 1976 to 9,759 items in 2021. USA ranked first with publishing 75,742 papers, followed by Germany with 17,718 papers and England with 14,244 papers. League of European Research Universities (LERU) ranked first among research institutes with publishing 6,517 papers. In journals, Laryngoscope ranked first with publishing 17,891 papers, followed by Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery with 14,340 papers and Journal of Laryngology and Otology with 11,219 papers. The majority of papers were in English (n=199,069; %91,725) and original articles (n=167,724; %77.28). After otorhinolaryngology as the first-ranked area with full coverage, surgery (n=37,586) and audiology speech language pathology (n=22,136) ranked second and third, respectively. 10 highly-occurred keywords were surgery (110), management (94), children (83), quality of life (81), squamous-cell carcinoma (78), cancer (75), head (73), radiotherapy (69), cochlear implant and noise (58) and experience (53), respectively. Co-citation clustering showed Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Laryngoscope, Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery and Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology as the top cited sources. Conclusion: This study is the first to give a comprehensive bibliometric analysis and visualization of global research publication in otorhinolaryngology. It recognized important and influential papers, journals, authors, research institutions, countries and topic areas as well as main considerable keywords and subject clusters and cited sources

What We Know about Top 1000 Highly-Cited COVID-19 Papers: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background: Highly cited papers are considered publications with a great impact on a scientific community and have been deeply investigated in different fields. Aim: This study aimed at analyzing and visualizing the top 1000 highly cited papers on COVID-19. Methods: As a bibliometric study, this study was conducted by retrieving 1000 highly-cited papers on COVID-19 published during 2019-2021 from Scopus. The search strategy was to obtain 35 related keywords/terms on the COVID-19 as the main term from MeSH and searching them in the fields of paper titles, abstracts, and keywords. Bibliometric techniques such as co-citation analysis, co-authorship analysis and word co-occurrence analysis were used for the study. Data visualization was done by applying the VOSviewer software package and GunnMap. Results: China, the United States of America (USA), and the United Kingdom (UK) with publishing 418, 353, and 149, mostly cited papers were ranked first-to-third, respectively. The top contributing research institutes were from China and the USA. The top three most productive research institutions were Huazhong University of Science and Technology (N=83), Tongji Medical College (N=76), and Wuhan University (N=64), respectively. The New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet and JAMA ranked first to third in publishing these papers, respectively. Collaborating countries were mainly of European origin. Research institutes from China, the USA, and the UK had higher collaboration. Keyword clustering showed that the clinical features and laboratory descriptions, risk factors, pathogenic and immunological aspects as well as the managerial aspects and urgent preparation of the disease were topics with high concern and concentration. Conclusion: This study is the first bibliometric study on the top 1000 highly cited papers on COVID-19 and can be beneficial to researchers in identifying important topics, active producing agents and existing gaps in the literature on the disease. It can be conceived as a reference for COVID-19 researchers and a guide for conducting other bibliometric studies on COVID-19 scientific investigation