ArticleBMC psychiatry2015
Visualization analysis of author collaborations in schizophrenia research.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Bibliometric Analysis for Medical Research.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in schizophrenia research: a quantitative review and future directions.AIMS neuroscience · 2023Review
- Child psychiatry: A scientometric analysis 1980-2016.F1000Research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSchizophrenia is a serious mental illness that levies a heavy medical toll and cost burden throughout the world. Scientific collaborations are necessary for progress in psychiatric research. However, there have been few publications on scientific collaborations in schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent of author collaborations in schizophrenia research.
methodsThis study used 58,107 records on schizophrenia from 2003 to 2012 which were downloaded from Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI Expanded) via Web of Science. CiteSpace III, an information visualization and analysis software, was used to make a visual analysis.
resultsCollaborative author networks within the field of schizophrenia were determined using published documents. We found that external author collaboration networks were more scattered while potential author collaboration networks were more compact. Results from hierarchical clustering analysis showed that the main collaborative field was genetic research in schizophrenia.
conclusionBased on the results, authors belonging to different institutions and in different countries should be encouraged to collaborate in schizophrenia research. This will help researchers focus their studies on key issues, and allow each other to offer reasonable suggestions for making polices and providing scientific evidence to effectively diagnose, prevent, and cure schizophrenia.
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.