ReviewCureus2025
Bibliometric Analysis of Global Scientific Literature on Mumps Vaccines.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Serological Mumps Evaluation of Medical Students in Catalonia (Spain): Is a Third Dose of Vaccine Needed?Journal of medical virology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mumps is a vaccine-preventable disease commonly affecting children. Mumps vaccines (MuVac) are currently marketed in polyvalent forms. This study used bibliometric analysis to study the pattern of performance of articles, authors, and journals, and to disclose gaps and constituents of research on MuVac. The study was conducted using the Scopus database. Different keywords related to MuVac were identified, and a search was conducted. All studies published in any language between 1972 and 2021 were included in the analysis. The data was exported, a basic descriptive analysis was done, and an analysis was done using the Biblioshiny R software package. VOSviewer software was used to construct and visualize the bibliometric network. A total of 699 publications on MuVac were gathered, with an average citation of 33.87. The maximum number of 66 articles was published in 2015. Using Bradford's law, the core zone contained 14 journals with 232 articles. Top documents were analyzed based on top local citations, global citations, and the highest locally cited references. Best authors based on the highest number of studies published, citations, and author impact were analyzed using h-, g-, and m-induces. Journal-level performances were analyzed in the headings of top sources, the journal with the highest total number of citations. The study using bibliometric analysis has helped to identify top authors, journals, institutions, and countries in the field of research on MuVac. This study has summarised the pattern and trends of research activity on MuVac and will help provide valuable perspectives and direction for future studies. Newer software like R and VOSviewer helps conduct bibliometric analysis and data visualization.
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.