ArticleDigital health
Science mapping of COVID-19 contributions in primary health care by OECD countries: A machine learning approach.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: Our study comprehensively assesses how Canada and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries have supported researchers, research institutes and their scientific productivity in primary health care (PHC), one of the areas most affected by COVID-19. Method: We analyzed research contributions among OECD countries and assessed their scientific productivity during COVID-19 using bibliometric methods and machine learning techniques. Our analysis includes co-authorship networks, funding patterns, co-citation analysis, thematic mapping, factor analysis, and topic modeling through latent Dirichlet allocation. Results: This study analyzes 1061 articles and review papers involving 5765 researchers from OECD countries. PHC systems played a crucial role in the global response to SARS-CoV2 but faced significant challenges. Canada ranks third in PHC research output and forth in COVID-19 research among OECD nations. The findings reveal Canada's strong collaborative ties with countries such as the USA, UK, and Australia. However, disparities in PHC scientific productivity across OECD countries remain, with some nations showing minimal progress. Conclusions: Our study highlights the importance of academic collaboration in addressing pandemic-related crises. The study recommends enhancing international collaboration, led by countries such as Canada, the USA, and the UK, to strengthen PHC systems during global health crises. It is deemed necessary to include experts and academics from the field of PHC in such structures. It also emphasizes the need for academic journals to improve transparency in funding sources through automated extraction of bibliometric data from platforms such as Web of Science and Scopus, which is crucial for shaping future health and education policies.
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.