ArticleIntelligence-based medicine2021
A critical analysis of COVID-19 research literature: Text mining approach.
Article in Intelligence-based medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A text mining and network analysis of topics and trends in major nursing research journals.Nursing open · 2024Article
- Oral manifestations in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) identified using text mining: an observational study.Scientific reports · 2023Observational
- Investigating Topic Modeling Techniques to Extract Meaningful Insights in Italian Long COVID Narration.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2022Article
- The deployment of social media by political authorities and health experts to enhance public information during the COVID-19 pandemic.SSM - population health · 2022Article
- Detecting Latent Topics and Trends in Global Publications on Brucellosis Disease Using Text Mining.Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Approaches for text mining of mHealth literature.mHealth · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAmong the stakeholders of COVID-19 research, clinicians particularly experience difficulty keeping up with the deluge of SARS-CoV-2 literature while performing their much needed clinical duties. By revealing major topics, this study proposes a text-mining approach as an alternative to navigating large volumes of COVID-19 literature. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe obtained 85,268 references from the NIH COVID-19 Portfolio as of November 21. After the exclusion based on inadequate abstracts, 65,262 articles remained in the final corpus. We utilized natural language processing to curate and generate the term list. We applied topic modeling analyses and multiple correspondence analyses to reveal the major topics and the associations among topics, journal countries, and publication sources.
resultsIn our text mining analyses of NIH's COVID-19 Portfolio, we discovered two sets of eleven major research topics by analyzing abstracts and titles of the articles separately. The eleven major areas of COVID-19 research based on abstracts included the following topics: 1) Public Health, 2) Patient Care & Outcomes, 3) Epidemiologic Modeling, 4) Diagnosis and Complications, 5) Mechanism of Disease, 6) Health System Response, 7) Pandemic Control, 8) Protection/Prevention, 9) Mental/Behavioral Health, 10) Detection/Testing, 11) Treatment Options. Further analyses revealed that five (2,3,4,5, and 9) of the eleven abstract-based topics showed a significant correlation (ranked from moderate to weak) with title-based topics.
conclusionBy offering up the more dynamic, scalable, and responsive categorization of published literature, our study provides valuable insights to the stakeholders of COVID-19 research, particularly clinicians.
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.