Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32481379›Full record

ReviewMedicine2020

The status and trends of coronavirus research: A global bibliometric and visualized analysis.

Xingjia Mao, Lu Guo, Panfeng Fu, Chuan Xiang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Global Trends in Atherosclerosis Research in the Epigenetics Field: Bibliometric and Visualization Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  13. Is rapid scientific publication also high quality? Bibliometric analysis of highly disseminated COVID-19 research papers.Learned publishing : journal of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. A Bibliometric Network Analysis of Coronavirus during the First Eight Months of COVID-19 in 2020.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Xingjia MaoOrthopedic Department, Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan.
Lu GuoBeijing Institute of Genomics, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing.
Panfeng FuDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care, The Affiliated Hospital of Medical School of Ningbo University, Ningbo, China.
Chuan XiangOrthopedic Department, Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan.ORCID 0000-0002-1121-6443
Shanxi Medical University · CNBeijing Institute of Genomics · CNNingbo University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe infectious pneumonia caused by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, from December 2019 and spread the whole country and even other 24 countries. Coronavirus research is of significance to overcome the epidemic. Our study aims to investigate the global status and trends of coronavirus research.

methodPublications related to the studies of coronavirus research from January 1, 2003 to February 6, 2020 were retrieved from the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) of the Web of Science database. A total of 9294 publications were included. The data source was studied and indexed by bibliometric methodology. For visualized study, bibliographic coupling analysis, co-authorship analysis, co-citation analysis, co-occurrence analysis and the analysis of publication trends in coronavirus research were conducted by VOS (visualization of similarities) viewer and GraphPadPrism 6 software.

resultsThe number of publications about coronavirus research increased sharply in 2004 for SARS outbreak and increased again in 2012 for MERS outbreak. The USA made the highest contributions to the global research with the most total number of publications, total citation frequency, and the highest H-index, while Netherlands had the highest average citation per item. Journal of Virology had the largest publication numbers. The University of Hong Kong is the most contributive institution with the most publications. The main research orientation and funding agency were virology and United States Department of Health Human Services. Keywords of all related studies could be divided into 4 clusters: "Pathological research," "Epidemiology research," "Clinical research," and "Mechanism research."

conclusionsThe outbreak of the epidemic could promote coronavirus research, meanwhile, coronavirus research contributes to overcoming the epidemic. Attention should be drawn to the latest popular research, including "Spike protein," "Receptor binding domain," and "Vaccine." Therefore, more and more efforts will be put into mechanism research and vaccine research and development, which can be helpful to deal with the epidemic.

Indexed as

BibliometricsCoronavirusBetacoronavirusBiomedical ResearchHumansInternationalitySARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID32481379
PMCPMC12245254
OpenAlexW3031399436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.