Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40767204›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2025

Scholarly Publications and Opinions Through 366-Day War on Gaza (2023-2024): A Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis.

Emna Ennouri, Mohamed Boussarsar, Chourouk Ben Mahfoudh, Khamis Elessi, Helmi Ben Saad

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Emna EnnouriFaculty of Medicine of Sousse, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.ORCID 0000-0001-6123-7050
Mohamed BoussarsarFaculty of Medicine of Sousse, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.ORCID 0000-0002-7557-2156
Chourouk Ben MahfoudhFaculty of Medicine of Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.ORCID 0009-0008-6966-3570
Khamis ElessiEvidence-Based Medicine Unit, Faculty of Medicine - Islamic University of Gaza, Gaza, Palestine.ORCID 0000-0002-9313-9401
Helmi Ben SaadFaculty of Medicine of Sousse, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.ORCID 0000-0002-7477-2965

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2023-2024 Gaza Genocide has generated notable scholarly discourse, influenced by various historical, political, and social contexts. These academic writings, rooted in the longstanding "war of words," illustrate how language serves as a potent weapon in conflicts. The present study aimed to analyze the academic response to the 2023-2024 War on Gaza, focusing on the different perspectives, opinions, and lexical choices in scholarly articles.

methodsA scoping review and bibliometric analysis were conducted on articles from PubMed, pertaining to the 2023-2024 War on Gaza, spanning from October 7, 2023, to October 7, 2024. PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines were used. Individual relevant papers' data were systematically extracted using a pre-tested form. Articles were categorized based on their stances as pro-Gaza, pro-Israel, or Neutral. Statistical analyses compared the bibliometric data of pro-Gaza and pro-Israel papers, identifying significant associated lexical fields. Factors explaining the different stances were uncovered.

resultsOut of 640 articles identified, 221 were included in the review. Among these, 126 (57%), pro-Gaza, 70 (31.7%), pro-Israel, and 25 (11.3%), Neutral. Pro-Gaza papers, often published in high-ranked journals with global affiliations, focused on humanitarian issues, called for a ceasefire and decried the genocide. Conversely, pro-Israel papers, often from local journals and affiliated with Israeli institutions, focused on political and psychosocial aspects, emphasizing self-defense narratives. Terms independently associated with pro-Gaza positions included "Gaza" in the title, "occupation," "genocide," "punishment," and "ceasefire." Pro-Israel papers featured "Israel" in the title, references to "October 7," and mentions of "Hamas."

conclusionThis study highlights that academic narratives are profoundly influenced by historical contexts, media portrayal, official discourses, and the authors' socio-political environments. These findings underscore the intricate connection between scholarly discourse and the broader context of chronic occupation, revealing significant limitations in current global health strategies and highlighting the need to integrate humanitarian crises into these frameworks.

Indexed as

BibliometricsGenocideScholarly CommunicationWarfareHumansMiddle EastDecolonizingGaza Strip (Palestine)GenocideIsraelLexical FieldsScholarly Publishing

Identifiers

PMID40767204
PMCPMC12089835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.