ArticleF1000Research2025
Popularity and diversity: The negative relationship in baby names in the United Kingdom.
Article in F1000Research, 2025. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous research has shown that popular names have become less popular over time. Simultaneously, accumulated evidence has indicated that names have become more diverse. However, the association between these two phenomena was unclear. This association should be revealed for a better understanding of names and naming practices. Therefore, this study investigated the relationship between the popularity and diversity of names. Methods: I analyzed the data provided in a previous study in the U.K., which included complete records of all live births between 1996 and 2016 (N = 12,985,140). Results: I found that the correlations between diversity and popularity indicators were highly negative, showing that they are conceptually strongly related. This means that when diversity is high, popularity is low. Conclusions: Based on this study, we can predict one indicator from the other indicator. Because raw data on names are generally difficult to collect, this prediction is useful for understanding names and naming practices.
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.