Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35958287›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2022

Nigeria's scientific contributions to COVID-19: A bibliometric analysis.

Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi, Mkpouto Pius

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Yusuff Adebayo AdebisiFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Mkpouto PiusBiomarker Systems (Biomasys), UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted a historic global research effort to create a knowledge base that can guide mitigation strategies. This study uses the Scopus database to examine the literature published by Nigerian institutions since the outbreak of COVID-19, with a focus on bibliometric items, global collaboration, Scopus subject area classification, document types, active authors and institutions, journals, highly cited papers, and funding agencies. Method: We searched for articles indexed in the Scopus database between January 1st, 2020 and July 20th, 2022 using predetermined search terms. All article types and study designs were included. Results: During the period under consideration, researchers affiliated with Nigerian institutions published a total of 2,217 COVID-19 papers out of a total of 281,589 global outputs, implying that Nigerian institutions contributed 0.8% of total global COVID-19 scientific output. The majority of the documents published were articles/original research (n = 1,455, 68.4%). The National Institute of Health was the top funder, and the University of Ibadan was the most active institution. The vast majority of publications (38.3%) were in the field of health sciences, with 1197 papers in the medicine sub-category. The top journal was Pan African Medical Journal, which published 114 COVID-19 papers with at least one Nigerian institution affiliation. The most active collaborator with Nigerian institutions was the United States. With 745 citations, the most cited paper with at least one Nigerian institution affiliation was from the Nigeria Center for Disease Control. Conclusion: Nigerian institutions have contributed to the scientific output of COVID-19. There is, however, a need to improve research capacity across all subject areas.

Identifiers

PMID35958287
PMCPMC9356628

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.