ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2025
Evaluation of New Zealand's Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Medical Imaging Research Output: A Bibliometric-Based Approach.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2025. 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.
- Local research productivity, trends, and collaboration among Filipino nuclear medicine physicians: A bibliometric analysis of the Philippine Journal of Nuclear Medicine.Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology · 2026Article
- Creating Our Professional Evidence-Base: A Journey, Not a Destination.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe use of medical imaging services has increased globally with a concurrent increase in radiology, nuclear medicine and medical imaging (RNMI) research. However, New Zealand's RNMI research output relative to global trends is under-examined. This project evaluates New Zealand's RNMI research output between 1996 and 2022 compared to selected countries while highlighting global RNMI research output trends.
methodsA bibliometric-based performance analysis was conducted using publication data from the SCImago Journal, the Country Rank portal, Clarivate InCites Benchmarking, and the Analytics platform. Registration data of RNMI professionals by country was collected to evaluate the relationship between research output and the number of registered professionals.
resultsAmong the seven selected countries (the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Ireland, New Zealand and South Africa), New Zealand's research output was low, even when adjusted for population size and the number of professionals. A significant positive correlation was found between the number of registered RNMI professionals and the number of RNMI publications. Despite this, New Zealand had the highest percentage of RNMI documents cited.
conclusionAlthough New Zealand's RNMI publications follow the global upward trend, it does so at a proportionate loss. New Zealand ranked low in most bibliometric indicators apart from the percentage of documents cited, where it showed a notable citation impact. Emphasising research, increasing collaborative efforts, and undertaking further statistical analyses may enhance New Zealand's RNMI research output.
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.