Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32603887›Full record

ArticleBiomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie2020

When science goes viral: The research response during three months of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Joanna Nowakowska, Joanna Sobocińska, Mateusz Lewicki, Żaneta Lemańska, Piotr Rzymski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A tale of two applications: lessons learned from national LMIC COVID applications.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Translating COVID-19: From Contagion to Containment.The Journal of medical humanities · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

5 authors.

Joanna NowakowskaPoznan University of Medical Sciences, Fredry 10, 61-701, Poznań, Poland.
Joanna SobocińskaPoznan University of Medical Sciences, Fredry 10, 61-701, Poznań, Poland.
Mateusz LewickiPomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Rybacka 1, 70-204, Szczecin, Poland.
Żaneta LemańskaPoznan University of Medical Sciences, Fredry 10, 61-701, Poznań, Poland.
Piotr RzymskiDepartment of Environmental Medicine, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Rokietnicka 8, 60-806, Poznań, Poland; Integrated Science Association (ISA), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Poznań, Poland. Electronic address: rzymskipiotr@ump.edu.pl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Here we present the results of a bibliometric survey of peer-reviewed and pre-print papers published in the English language on issues related to COVID-19 within the first three months since a cluster of a severe acute respiratory disease of unknown etiology was officially confirmed by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention on 31 December 2019. A systematic search using PubMed/Medline and Scopus databases and preprint servers was performed. The articles were classified according to their type, subject and country of origin. Up to 31 March 2020, a total of 2062 papers published in 578 peer-reviewed journals and 1425 preprints posted mostly on medRxiv (55.4 %), were identified. The mean number of published journal papers and preprints per day in the considered period was 27 and 12, respectively, and reached a maximum of 51 and 46 per day in March, respectively. The identified articles, journal papers and preprints, mostly covered the epidemiology of COVID-19 (35.7 %), clinical aspects of infection (21.0 %), preventative measures (12.8 %), treatment options (12.5 %), diagnostics (12.2 %), mathematical modeling of disease transmission and mitigation (9.6 %), and molecular biology and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 (8.7 %). The majority of the journal papers were commentaries (38.5 %), reviews (33.6 %) and original research (21.3 %), while preprints predominantly presented original results (89.8 %). Chinese scientists contributed the highest share of original research and were responsible for 32.9 % journal papers and 43.9 % preprints published in the considered period. A high number of contributions was also seen from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Italy. The benefits and potential risks of such a massive publication output are discussed. The scientific response seen during the first 3 months of the COVID-19 outbreak is a demonstration of the capabilities of modern science to react rapidly to emerging global health threats by providing and discussing the essential information for understanding the etiological factor, its spread, preventative measures, and mitigation strategies.

Indexed as

Coronavirus InfectionsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralBibliometricsCOVID-19Databases, FactualDisease OutbreaksHumansPeriodicals as TopicPublicationsAcademiaBibliometric analysisCOVID-19Emerging infectious diseaseSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID32603887
PMCPMC7309857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.