Search

Predatory publishing is the unethical and dishonest behavior of publishers who take advantage of researchers by charging them too much money and not providing good editing and peer-review services. Scholars, publishers and policymakers are seeking solutions to combat predatory publishing, which has become a major academic problem. This research paper provides a bibliometric analysis of the citation patterns and trends in the predatory publishing literature. The study analyzed the 100 top-cited papers on predatory publishing and provided insight into the types of documents, journals, authors, and countries that contributed to this field. The average citation per paper in the top 100 selected publications was 53.67. Open-access publications received a significantly higher average citation per paper than subscription-based papers. "Article" was the major type of document published, followed by "Notes," "Reviews" and "Editorials." Nature and Learned Publishing were the journals that contained the highest number of top-cited articles. J. Beall and D. Moher authored the highest number of papers, while A. Grudniewicz had the highest average citation per paper. USA and Canada were the top countries in these top-cited publications. This study will be beneficial to the all the stakeholders who may be interested in this area of research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study presents a global research scenario in the broad domain of osteoarthritis (OA) research, using quantitative and qualitative publication and citation indicators. Methods: The study is based on 45,368 global publications, sourced from the Scopus bibliographical database, covering three decades (1994–2023). We studied the performance of the top 12 developed and top 12 developing countries. The key countries, organizations and authors at national and international levels were identified. The broad subject areas and key journals contributing to global OA research were delineated, besides identifying the broad characteristics of highly cited papers in the field. Results: The United States and China were the most productive countries, while the Netherlands and Canada made the largest citation impact. Harvard Medical School and the University of Sydney made the most contribution, while Boston University and Pfizer Inc., USA registered the highest citation impact. Hunter DJ and Guermazi A were the most productive authors, while Lohmander LS, and Hochberg MC registered the highest citation impact. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (n = 4879) and Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (n = 786) published the maximum papers, while Arthritis and Rheumatism and Nature Reviews Rheumatology registered the largest citation impact. The highly cited papers with 100 or more citations constituted 6.25% of the total publications. Conclusions: There has been a systematic growth of publications on OA. The research on OA was mainly done in developed countries, with the maximum publications coming from the United States of America, China and Canada. The most impactful publications on OA were from the Netherlands, Canada and the United States of America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In celebration of the journal's 50th anniversary, the aim of the study was to review the whole collection of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (CDOE) publications from 1973 to 2022 and provide a complete overview of the main publication characteristics. Methods: The study used bibliometric techniques such as performance and science mapping analysis of 3428 articles extracted from the Scopus database. The data were analysed using the 'Bibliometrix' package in R. The journal's scientific production was examined, along with the yearly citation count, the distribution of publications based on authors, the corresponding author's country and affiliation and citation count, citing source and keywords. Bibliometric network maps were constructed to determine the conceptual, intellectual and social collaborative structure over the past 50 years. The trending research topics and themes were identified. Results: The total number of articles and average citations has increased over the years. D Locker, AJ Spencer, A Sheiham and WM Thomson were the most frequently published authors, and PE Petersen, GD Slade and AI Ismail published papers with the highest citations. The most published countries were the United States, United Kingdom, Brazil and Canada, frequently engaging in collaborative efforts. The most common keywords used were 'dental caries', 'oral epidemiology' and 'oral health'. The trending topics were healthcare and health disparities, social determinants of health, systematic review and health inequalities. Epidemiology, oral health and disparities were highly researched areas. Conclusion: This bibliometric study reviews CDOE's significant contribution to dental public health by identifying key research trends, themes, influential authors and collaborations. The findings provide insights into the need to increase publications from developing countries, improve gender diversity in authorship and broaden the scope of research themes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Internet of Things (IoT) is expanding rapidly and can potentially be a huge data source. This study aimed to close the knowledge gap about possible IoT applications in health care. English-language academic publications from the Web of Science (WoS) were used for the present study. Bibliometric networks were used to analyze pertinent publications to examine the connections between authors, nations, and affiliations. Papers on digital health care have been published in more than 1195 sources, among which the most popular was the Journal of Medical Internet Research. Six top institutions were from the Netherlands, making the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam the most productive institution after Australia and England. This study provides an overview of IoT-related research conducted in digital health care, helping academic researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to better understand the development of digital health care research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pectoral nerve blocks (Pecs I and Pecs II) are superficial thoracic wall blocks which block the pectoral and intercostal nerves. They can be used as analgesia/anesthesia for breast surgery and other procedures/surgeries involving the anterior chest wall (arteriovenous graft creation surgery, minimally invasive cardiac surgery and thoracotomy, etc.). The aim of this study is to evaluate publications in the scientific field of pectoral nerve blocks. ISI Web of Knowledge-Science was used for the analysis. All scientific works published included in the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) from 1975 to January 27, 2019, were analyzed. A retrospective search was performed using key words "pectoral nerve block," "PECS I," "PECS II," "pecs block," "PECS block,""Pecs I," "Pecs II," "PECS 1," "PECS 2," and "modified pecs I block." We further analyzed these results by the "analyze" function of the software in terms of number of papers for each country, type of documentation, number of publications per year, and name of journals and authors. The number of citations to published works was also calculated by using the citation function of the same software. 72 papers were found related to pectoral nerve block. The biggest contribution was from India (24.28%), and followed by Japan (14.28%), USA (14.28%), Canada (7.14%), Egypt (7.14%), Italy (5.71%), and South Korea (5.71%). The total number of publications increased sharply in years from 2014 (n = 1) to 2018 (n = 28). We have detected that papers on the use of pecs block in breast cancer surgery, which is one of the most common surgical procedure in the world, are few in the literature. With this study, we hope to increase the awareness on this area. We believe that pecs block applications will become widespread with the increasing use of ultrasound in anesthesia and the increase in education in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The "information age" ushered in an explosion of knowledge and access to knowledge that continues to revolutionize society. Knowledge about turtles, as measured by number of published papers, has been growing at an exponential rate since the early 1970s, a phenomenon mirrored in all scientific disciplines. Although knowledge about turtles, as measured by number of citations for papers in scientific journals, has been growing rapidly, this taxonomic group remains highly imperiled suggesting that knowledge is not always successfully translated into effective conservation of turtles. We reviewed the body of literature on turtles of the United States and Canada and found that: 1) the number of citations is biased toward large-bodied species, 2) the number of citations is biased toward wide-ranging species, and 3) conservation status has little effect on the accumulation of knowledge for a species, especially after removing the effects of body size or range size. The dispersion of knowledge, measured by Shannon Weiner diversity and evenness indices across species, was identical from 1994 to 2009 suggesting that poorly studied species remained poorly-studied species while well-studied species remained well studied. Several species listed as threatened or endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (e.g., Pseudemys alabamensis, Sternotherus depressus, and Graptemys oculifera) remain poorly studied with the estimated number of citations for each ranging from only 13-24. The low number of citations for these species could best be explained by their restricted distribution and/or their smaller size. Despite the exponential increase in knowledge of turtles in the United States and Canada, no species of turtle listed under the Endangered Species Act has ever been delisted for reason of recovery. Therefore, increased knowledge does not necessarily contribute appreciably to recovery of threatened turtles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grizzly bears inhabit wilderness areas in the northwestern region of the lower forty-eight states, western Canada, and areas of Alaska. Because of the settlement of the west and loss of prime habitat, populations declined rapidly in the nineteenth century, and in 1975 federal action was taken to protect grizzlies under the Endangered Species Act. Since 1950 about 722 technical papers have been written on the grizzly bear. Major research has focused on ecology, conservation, reproductive biology, behavior, dietetics, anatomy, and physiology, among other topics. Due to geographic distribution of the species, much of the research has been carried out by authors and organizations in western regions of the United States and Canada where major grizzly populations exist. A significant number of technical papers appear in three key journals: Ursus, the Journal of Wildlife Management, and the Canadian Journal of Zoology. According to data in WorldCat, about 1,167 records, covering monographs and technical reports, contain information on grizzlies and present research findings. The bulk of monographs appeal mainly to a general audience. However, citation analysis reveals a core of highly cited technical papers, many written with an emphasis on special themes or topics, whereas others focus on the grizzly itself, all together advancing the science on this species. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Using a data set integrating information about researchers' funding and publications in Quebec (Canada), this paper identifies the main determinants of citation counts as one measure of research impact. Using two-stage least square regressions to control for endogeneity, the results confirm the significant and positive relationship between the number of articles and citation counts. Our results also show that scientists with more articles in higher impact factor journals generally receive more citations and so do scientists who publish with a larger team of authors. Hence the greater visibility provided by a more prolific scientific production, better journals, and more co-authors, all contribute to increasing the perceived impact of articles. All else being equal, male and female receive the same number of citations. These results suggest that the most important determinants of researchers' citations are the journals in which they publish, as well the collaborative nature of their research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

hack t.f.,crooks d., plohman j. & kepron e. (2010) Research citation analysis of nursing academics in Canada: identifying success indicators. Journal of Advanced Nursing 66(11), 2542-2549. Aim. This article is a report of a citation analysis of research publications by Canadian nursing academics. Background. Citation analysis can yield objective criteria for assessing the value of published research and is becoming increasingly popular as an academic evaluation tool in universities around the world. Citation analysis is useful for examining the research performance of academic researchers and identifying leaders among them. Methods. The journal publication records of 737 nursing academics at 33 Canadian universities and schools of nursing were subject to citation analysis using the Scopus database. Three primary types of analysis were performed for each individual: number of citations for each journal publication, summative citation count of all published papers and the Scopus h-index. Preliminary citation analysis was conducted from June to July 2009, with the final analysis performed on 2 October 2009 following e-mail verification of publication lists. Results. The top 20 nursing academics for each of five citation categories are presented: the number of career citations for all publications, number of career citations for first-authored publications, most highly cited first-authored publications, the Scopus h-index for all publications and the Scopus h-index for first-authored publications. Conclusion. Citation analysis metrics are useful for evaluating the research performance of academic researchers in nursing. Institutions are encouraged to protect the research time of successful and promising nursing academics, and to dedicate funds to enhance the research programmes of underperforming academic nursing groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]