ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2009
Bibliometric analysis of obstructive sleep apnea research trends.
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Global Risk Factor Evaluation of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Relation to Research Activity and Socioeconomic Factors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- A Bibliometric Profile of Disaster Medicine Research from 2008 to 2017: A Scientometric Analysis.Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2019Article
- Review
- Publication trends in obstructive sleep apnea: Evidence of need for more evidence.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2017Article
- Article
- Scientific research in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: bibliometric analysis in SCOPUS, 1991-2012.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2015Article
- Tracing 28 Years of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research Performance in Saudi Arabia: A Bibliometric Analysis with Visualizations (1995-2023).Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to describe current trends and areas of future research using a bibliometric evaluation of the publication output associated with research on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) during the 16-year period of 1991-2006.
methodsData encompassing the period from 1991 to 2006 were extracted from the Science Citation Index online version. We analyzed selected documents with "obstructive sleep apnea", "obstructive apnea", or "OSA" as a part of the title, abstract, or key words and reported the following parameters: trends of publication output, journal pattern, country of publication, authorship, author-generated key words, and KeyWords Plus.
resultsThe annual number of articles on OSA grew at a faster rate than did the number of general scientific publications, from approximately 200 in 1991 to 650 in 2006. The main subject categories in which research on OSA was conducted were the respiratory system and clinical neurology, each of which accounted for > 10% of total articles. Most of the research was conducted in the major industrial countries, with most international collaborations involving the United States and Canada. Certain terms were identified by KeyWords Plus but not by author-generated key words, and some terms increased in frequency of use over time.
conclusionThis study provides a bibliometric analysis showing that the annual number of publications related to OSA has been increasing at a much faster rate than the overall scientific literature during the past 16 years in a growing number of specialized journals. Analysis of key words (KeyWords Plus) suggests research trends and areas for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.