Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31658763›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

A Bibliometric Analysis of Crowdsourcing in the Field of Public Health.

Lingling Wang, Enjun Xia, Hao Li, Wei Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Bibliometric Analysis of Health Technology Research: 1990~2020.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Research on Health Disparities Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Bibliometric Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lingling WangSchool of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China. 3120160717@bit.edu.cn.
Enjun XiaSchool of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China. enjunxia@bit.edu.cn.
Hao LiSchool of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China. ncepulh@126.com.
Wei WangSchool of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China. wangwei666892@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the characteristics of low cost and open call, crowdsourcing has been widely adopted in many fields, particularly to support the use of surveys, data processing, and the monitoring of public health. The objective of the current study is to analyze the applications, hotspots, and emerging trends of crowdsourcing in the field of public health. Using CiteSpace for the visualization of scientific maps, this study explores the analysis of time-scope, countries and institutions, authors, published journals, keywords, co-references, and citation clusters. The results show that the United States is the country with the most publications regarding crowdsourcing applications for public health. Howe and Brabham are the two leading authors in this field. Further, most of the articles published in this field are found in medical and comprehensive journals. Crowdsourcing in public health is increasing and diversifying. The results of this study will enable and support the analysis of the specific role of crowdsourcing in the public health ecosystem.

Indexed as

BibliometricsCrowdsourcingPublic HealthHumansPeriodicals as TopicUnited StatesbibliometricsCiteSpacecrowdsourcingpublic health

Identifiers

PMID31658763
PMCPMC6843338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.