ArticleCureus2020
The Productivity of Medical Publication on COVID-19 in the First Half of 2020: A Retrospective Analysis of Articles Available in PubMed.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic depends on the profound investigation of the virus biology and its consequences. We aimed to analyze the COVID-19 research productivity of authors representing different countries and associations between the number of articles and COVID-19 spread. Methods We retrieved all articles on COVID-19 indexed in PubMed between 31 December 2019 and 30 June 2020. We identified the countries of individual authors' affiliations. We performed the R Spearman rank correlation test between the number of articles with at least one author from a country per one million citizens and Human Development Index (HDI), a number of COVID-19 cases and deaths per one million citizens before 1 July 2020. Results Overall, we identified 27,815 articles, including 18,225 original contributions, 2,449 reviews, and 69 meta-analyses on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The highest productivity characterized the authors coming from China (n = 11,519 articles with at least one author), followed by the United States of America (n = 9,666) and Italy (n = 7,261). The number of articles on COVID-19 associated with HDI (Rs = 0.79), the numbers of cases (Rs = 0.47), and deaths (Rs = 0.46) (all p < 0.001). Conclusions Early COVID-19 researches were most often authored by researchers from highly developed countries and those affected by the rapid initial spread of SARS-CoV-2.
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.