ArticleMedicine2023
Analyzing the number of articles with network meta-analyses using chord diagrams and temporal heatmaps over the past 10 years: Bibliometric analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNetwork meta-analyses (NMAs) are statistical techniques used to synthesize data from multiple studies and compare the effectiveness of different interventions for a particular disease or condition. They have gained popularity in recent years as a tool for evidence-based decision making in healthcare. Whether publications in NMAs have an increasing trend is still unclear. This study aimed to investigate the trends in the number of NMA articles over the past 10 years when compared to non-NMA articles.
methodsThe study utilized data from the Web of Science database, specifically searching for articles containing the term "meta-analysis" published between 2013 and 2022. The analysis examined the annual number of articles, as well as the countries, institutions, departments, and authors associated with the articles and the journals in which they were published. Ten different visualization techniques, including line charts, choropleth maps, chord diagrams, circle packing charts, forest plots, temporal heatmaps, impact beam plots, pyramid plots, 4-quadrant radar plots, and scatter plots, were employed to support the hypothesis that the number of NMA-related articles has increased (or declined) over the past decade when compared to non-NMA articles.
resultsOur findings indicate that there was no difference in mean citations or publication trends between NMA and non-NMA; the United States, McMaster University (Canada), medical schools, Dan Jackson from the United Kingdom, and the Journal of Medicine (Baltimore) were among the leading entities; NMA ranked highest on the coword analysis, followed by heterogeneity, quality, and protocol, with weighted centrality degrees of 32.51, 30.84, 29.43, and 24.26, respectively; and the number of NMA-related articles had increased prior to 2020 but experienced a decline in the past 3 years, potentially due to being overshadowed by the intense academic focus on COVID-19.
conclusionIt is evident that the number of NMA articles increased rapidly between 2013 and 2019 before leveling off in the years following. For researchers, policymakers, and healthcare professionals who are interested in evidence-based decision making, the visualizations used in this study may be useful.
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.