Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32163439›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

The global scientific research response to the public health emergency of Zika virus infection.

Juliane Fonseca de Oliveira, Julia Moreira Pescarini, Moreno de Souza Rodrigues, Bethania de Araujo Almeida, Claudio Maierovitch Pessanha Henriques, Fabio Castro Gouveia, Elaine Teixeira Rabello, Gustavo Correa Matta, Mauricio L Barreto, Ricardo Barros Sampaio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Identification of Research Priorities during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Implications for Its Management.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

10 authors.

Juliane Fonseca de OliveiraCentro de Integração de Dados e Conhecimentos para Saúde (Cidacs), Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Julia Moreira PescariniCentro de Integração de Dados e Conhecimentos para Saúde (Cidacs), Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Moreno de Souza RodriguesCentro de Integração de Dados e Conhecimentos para Saúde (Cidacs), Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1594-2311
Bethania de Araujo AlmeidaCentro de Integração de Dados e Conhecimentos para Saúde (Cidacs), Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Claudio Maierovitch Pessanha HenriquesGerência Regional de Brasília, Fiocruz, Brasília, Brazil.
Fabio Castro GouveiaCasa Oswaldo Cruz, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Elaine Teixeira RabelloInstituto de Medicina Social, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Gustavo Correa MattaEscola Nacional de Saúde Pública, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Mauricio L BarretoCentro de Integração de Dados e Conhecimentos para Saúde (Cidacs), Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Ricardo Barros SampaioCentro de Integração de Dados e Conhecimentos para Saúde (Cidacs), Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6989-8555

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScience studies have been a field of research for different knowledge areas, and they have been successfully used to analyse the construction of scientific knowledge, practice and dissemination. In this study, we aimed to verify how the Zika epidemic has moulded the scientific articles published worldwide by analysing international collaborations and the knowledge landscape through time, as well as research topics and country involvement. METHODOLOGY: We searched the Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and PubMed for studies published up to 31st December 2018 on Zika using the search terms "zika", "zkv" or "zikv". We analysed the scientific production regarding which countries have published the most, on which topics, as well as country level collaboration. We performed a scientometric analysis of research on Zika focusing on knowledge mapping and the scientific research path over time and space.

findingsWe found two well defined research areas divided into three subtopics accounting for six clusters. With regard to country analysis, the USA and Brazil were the countries with the highest numbers of publications on Zika. China entered as a new player focusing on specific research areas. When we took into consideration the epidemics and reported cases, Brazil and France were the leading research countries on related topics. As for international collaboration, the USA followed by England and France stand out as the main hubs. The research areas most published included public health-related topics from 2015 until the very beginning of 2016, followed by an increase in topics related to the clinical aspects of the disease in 2016 and the emergence of laboratory research in 2017/2018.

conclusionsMapping the response to Zika, a public health emergency, demonstrated a clear pattern of the participation of countries in the scientific advances. The pattern of knowledge production found in this study represented varying country perspectives, research capacity and interests based first on their level of exposure to the epidemic and second on their financial positions regarding science.

Indexed as

EpidemicsBibliometricsBiomedical ResearchBrazilChinaCommunicable Diseases, EmergingEnglandFranceHumansPublic HealthPublishingResearch ReportUnited StatesZika Virus Infection

Identifiers

PMID32163439
PMCPMC7067462

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.