ArticleScientometrics2021
Topic evolution, disruption and resilience in early COVID-19 research.
Article in Scientometrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The long COVID research literature.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2023Pooled it
- The pivot penalty in research.Nature · 2025Article
- Biosocial Technical Systems: An Emerging Approach to Analyse Responses to Novel Diseases.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Article
- An embedding approach for analyzing the evolution of research topics with a case study on computer science subdomains.Scientometrics · 2023Article
- 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
- Article
- Managerial Responses to the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Healthcare Organizations Project Management.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Breaking community boundary: Comparing academic and social communication preferences regarding global pandemics.Journal of informetrics · 2021Article
- International collaboration during the COVID-19 crisis: autumn 2020 developments.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- A qualitative and quantitative analysis of open citations to retracted articles: the Wakefield 1998 et al.'s case.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Profiling COVID-19 Genetic Research: A Data-Driven Study Utilizing Intelligent Bibliometrics.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic presented a challenge to the global research community as scientists rushed to find solutions to the devastating crisis. Drawing expectations from resilience theory, this paper explores how the trajectory of and research community around the coronavirus research was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Characterizing epistemic clusters and pathways of knowledge through extracting terms featured in articles in early COVID-19 research, combined with evolutionary pathways and statistical analysis, the results reveal that the pandemic disrupted existing lines of coronavirus research to a large degree. While some communities of coronavirus research are similar pre- and during COVID-19, topics themselves change significantly and there is less cohesion amongst early COVID-19 research compared to that before the pandemic. We find that some lines of research revert to basic research pursued almost a decade earlier, whilst others pursue brand new trajectories. The epidemiology topic is the most resilient among the many subjects related to COVID-19 research. Chinese researchers in particular appear to be driving more novel research approaches in the early months of the pandemic. The findings raise questions about whether shifts are advantageous for global scientific progress, and whether the research community will return to the original equilibrium or reorganize into a different knowledge configuration.
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.