Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37292336›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

An analysis of reporting practices in the top 100 cited health and medicine-related bibliometric studies from 2019 to 2021 based on a proposed guidelines.

Malcolm Koo, Shih-Chun Lin

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Mapping 25 years of research on gut microbiota and antibiotic resistance: bibliometric insights and future directions.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Global Trends in Diabetic Foot Research (2004-2023): A Bibliometric Study Based on the Scopus Database.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Malcolm KooGraduate Institute of Long-term Care, Tzu Chi University of Science and Technology, Hualien City, Hualien, 970302, Taiwan.
Shih-Chun LinDepartment of Nursing, Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Dalin, Chiayi, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bibliometric analysis has gained popularity as a quantitative research methodology to evaluate scholarly productivity and identify trends within specific research areas. However, there are currently no established reporting guidelines for bibliometric studies. The present study aimed to investigate the reporting practices of bibliometric research related to health and medicine based on a guidelines "Preferred Reporting Items for Bibliometric Analysis (PRIBA)" proposed in this study. The Science Citation Index, Expanded of the Web of Science was used to identify the top 100 articles with the highest normalized citation counts per year. The search was conducted on April 9, 2022, using the search topic "bibliometric" and including publications from 2019 to 2021. The results substantiated the need for a standardized reporting guideline for bibliometric research. Specifically, among the 25 proposed items in the PRIBA, only five were consistently reported across all articles examined. Further, 11 items were reported by at least 80% of the articles, while nine items were reported by less than 80% of the articles. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the reporting practices of bibliometric studies in the field of health and medicine are in need of improvement. Future research should be conducted to refine the PRIBA guidelines.

Indexed as

BibliometricsReporting guidelinesScientific publicationsScientometrics

Identifiers

PMID37292336
PMCPMC10245063

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.