ReviewIranian journal of public health2021
A Worldwide Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on Coronavirus in the Past 3 Decades: A Bibliometric Article.
Review in Iranian journal of public health, 2021. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronaviruses caused three pandemics and impact public health globally in the 21st century. However, limited data were for the evaluation of the trend of coronavirus researches. We aimed to analyze quantitatively, qualitatively, and visually evaluate global scientific publications on coronavirus by using bibliometric analysis. Methods: Coronavirus-related research from 1990-2019 was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database (WoS). Microsoft Excel and VOS viewer software were used to assess the characteristics of publications. Results: Overall, 9,553 publications on coronavirus were retrieved on 12 Mar 2020. The United States took a leading position in coronavirus-related research and accounted for more than one-thirds (36.7%) of all publications. The most productive journal in this field was Journal of Virology (1,056, 11.1%), and the most productive institution was University of Hong Kong (394, 4.1%). The main hot topics in coronavirus field were virus infection and protein. Active collaborations between countries were observed. Conclusion: Over the past three decades, coronavirus research has gradually increased due to two global outbreaks. Through this global bibliometric evaluation, some relevant evidence could be provided. Corresponding to the impact of novel coronavirus (COVID-19), a large number of articles can be expected to appear in the next few years, and international cooperation should be strengthened to solve the problem.
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.