ArticleScientometrics2020
Coronavirus mapping in scientific publications: When science advances rapidly and collectively, is access to this knowledge open to society?
Article in Scientometrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A bibliometric analysis of linguistic research on COVID-19.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Literature on the Early Phase of COVID-19 in Italy.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- Bibliometric analysis of Alzheimer's and dementia research in Latin America.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Comprehensive analysis of Saudi Arabia's research output: a bibliometric study (2013--2022).F1000Research · 2025Article
- Biosocial Technical Systems: An Emerging Approach to Analyse Responses to Novel Diseases.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Global Mapping and Visualization Analysis of One Health Knowledge in the COVID-19 Context.Environmental health insights · 2024Article
- Social Network Analysis of COVID-19 Research and the Changing International Collaboration Structure.Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (science) · 2022Article
- Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19: A first approach.Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · 2022Article
- Tracking Openness and Topic Evolution of COVID-19 Publications January 2020-March 2021: Comprehensive Bibliometric and Topic Modeling Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Review
- Eye-Related COVID-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Production Indexed in Scopus.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Is coronavirus-related research becoming more interdisciplinary? A perspective of co-occurrence analysis and diversity measure of scientific articles.Technological forecasting and social change · 2022Article
- The role of blogs and news sites in science communication during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2022Review
- The state of social science research on COVID-19.Scientometrics · 2022Article
- Between panic and motivation: did the first wave of COVID-19 affect scientific publishing in Mediterranean countries?Scientometrics · 2022Article
- Visibility, collaboration and impact of the Cuban scientific output on COVID-19 in Scopus.Heliyon · 2021Article
- The Top 100 Most Cited Articles Published in Dentistry: 2020 Update.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Bibliometric Network Analysis of Coronavirus during the First Eight Months of COVID-19 in 2020.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Research on Covid-19: a disruptive phenomenon for bibliometrics.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Evolution and structure of research fields driven by crises and environmental threats: the COVID-19 research.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Pandemic publication: correction and erratum in COVID-19 publications.Scientometrics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic is creating a global health emergency. Mapping this health emergency in scientific publications demands multiple approaches to obtain a picture as complete as possible. To progress in the knowledge of this pandemic and to control its effects, international collaborations between researchers are essentials, as well as having open and immediate access to scientific publications, what we called "coopetition". Our main objectives are to identify the most productive countries in coronavirus publications, to analyse the international scientific collaboration on this topic, and to study the proportion and typology of open accessibility to these publications. We have analyzed 18,875 articles indexed in Web of Science. We performed the descriptive statistical analysis in order to explore the performance of the more prolific countries and organizations, as well as paying attention to the last 2 years. Registers have been analyzed separately via the VOSviewer software, drawing a network of links among countries and organizations to identify the starred countries and organizations, and the strongest links of the net. We have explored the capacity of researchers to generate scientific knowledge about a health crisis emergency, and their global capacity to collaborate among them in a global emergency. We consider that science is moving rapidly to find solutions to international health problems but access to this knowledge by society is not so quick due to several limitations (open access policies, corporate interests, etc.). We have observed that papers from China in the last 3 months (from January 2020 to March 2020) have a strong impact compared with papers published in years before. The United States and China are the major producers of documents of our sample, followed by all European countries, especially the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and France. At the same time, the leading role of Saudi Arabia, Canada or South Korea should be noted, with a significant number of documents submitted but very different dynamics of international collaboration. The proportion of international collaboration is growing in all countries in 2019-2020, which contrasts with the situation of the last two decades. The organizations providing the most documents to the sample are mostly Chinese. The percentage of open access articles on coronavirus for the period 2001-2020 is 59.2% but if we focus in 2020 the figures increase up to 91.4%, due to the commitment of commercial publishers with the emergency.
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.