Search

Objective: The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) stands out as one of the most prominent international journals publishing research in esthetic dentistry. This study analyzed articles published by JERD since the year 2000 through bibliometric analysis., Methodology: The search was conducted in January 2024 using Scopus. The following data were extracted from the articles: citation count, year, language, access type, funding agency, study design, theme (general and specific), country, institution, authors, and keywords. The VOSviewer software was used to generate collaborative network maps among the data. Dimensions were consulted to measure altmetric data. Google Trends was used to investigate the global popularity of JERD research., Results: A total of 1394 articles were included in this analysis. Citation count ranged from 0 to 625 (average: 16.9). Articles were published between 2000 and 2023. Laboratory studies were more prevalent (n = 850), with the most investigated general theme being restorative procedures (n = 882), and the highlighted specific theme being the use of composite resin (n = 327). The United States had the highest number of articles (n = 640), with the diverse distribution among other countries. The most common keyword was "cad/cam" (n = 63). VOSviewer demonstrated high collaboration among countries. Intense mentions were identified primarily on Facebook. According to Google Trends, Egypt was the country that searched for JERD the most., Conclusions: JERD exhibited significant growth in the number of published articles and their diversity by topics, types, origin (country), number of citations, and impact factor., Clinical Significance: The JERD is a journal that publishes studies influencing clinical practice. Identifying the key characteristics of this journal is essential for charting future paths., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The pulp and paper industry is one of the most significant industrial water polluters, generating large volumes of wastewater with high levels of organic pollutants, suspended solids, and other contaminants. Catalytic ozonation has emerged as a promising technique for the treatment of pulp and paper industry wastewater. Numerous reviews have presented the research on catalytic ozonation; however, open literature is missing a bibliometric analysis. Therefore, this article presents a bibliometric analysis of the research available on catalytic ozonation in pulp and paper industry wastewater treatment. A total of 578 documents extracted from the Scopus database have been examined via VOSviewer, MS Excel, and Rstudio to identify the research trends, influential authors, and research institutions in the field. The results reveal that the number of publications on the topic has increased significantly in recent years. This study also identified several influential authors, institutions, and highlighted future research directions in the field. Overall, the study provides insights into the state of research on catalytic ozonation in pulp and paper industry wastewater treatment and could help guide future research efforts in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study assessed the features of the 100 most‐cited papers on oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL). Methods: The 100 most‐cited OHRQoL papers were collected from Web of Science, adopting a combined keyword search strategy. Google Scholar and Scopus databases were searched to compare citations. The following data were extracted from papers: title of the paper, number of citations, authorship, country, year of publication, title of the journal, study design, sample size, topic and OHRQoL instruments used. Graphical bibliometric networks were created using VOSviewer software. Results: The number of citations of the top 100 most‐cited OHRQoL papers ranged from 73 to 949. Fifty‐six papers received at least 100 citations and two received more than 400 citations. Most papers were from Canada (23%) and had been published in Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (37%). David Locker was the most‐cited author (25 papers; 3,521 citations). The cross‐sectional study design was the most common (68%). The impact of oral health conditions on OHRQoL (43%) was the most frequent topic, and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) was the most commonly used OHRQoL instrument (48%). Conclusions: This bibliometric analysis highlighted the characteristics of the 100 most‐cited OHRQoL papers, demonstrating that this field is far from saturated. This list of the most‐cited articles can provide a reference point to guide oral health research, education and services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We apply bibliometric analysis to the review papers published in the finance domain, considering 264 review and qualitative studies. The approach applied in this study involves using review studies published in finance literature from 2000 to 2022, predominantly aiming at the pedigree of such papers and unfolding the renaissance experienced by such papers in recent years. We apply bibliometric analysis to know the most influential countries, authors, institutions, and journals publishing review papers. Results of the study identified four literature review clusters: The first cluster is related to 'corporate finance and financial markets', the second cluster combines the studies related to 'financial innovations and Fintech', the third cluster is related to 'social finance and financial inclusion', and finally, the fourth cluster combines the studies related to 'CSR and corporate governance'. We conclude that the bibliometric analysis and literature review papers are critical for identifying and highlighting the emerging problems in finance and motivating future academics to pursue further investigations and provide solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Journals occasionally solicit manuscripts for special collections, in which all papers are focused on a particular topic within the journal's scope. For the Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, there have been 51 special collections from 2005 through 2018, with a total of 1,009 papers out of the 8,881 total papers in the journal over those years (11%). Taken together, the citations to special collection papers, as well as other metrics, are slightly higher than papers not in special collections. Several paper characteristics were examined to assess whether they could explain the higher citation and download values for special collection papers, but they cannot. In addition, indirect methods were conducted for assessing self‐citations as an explanation for the increased citations, but no evidence was found to support this hypothesis. It was found that some paper types, notably Commentaries and Technical Reports, have lower average citations but higher average downloads than Research Articles (the most common type of paper in this journal). This implies that such paper types have a different kind of impact than "regular" science‐result‐focused papers. In addition to having higher average citations and downloads, special collections focus community attention on that particular research topic, providing a deadline for manuscript submissions and a single webpage at which many related papers are listed. It is concluded that special collections are worth the extra community effort in organization, writing, and reviewing these papers. Plain Language Summary: Journals sometimes focus the attention of the research community by having a special collection, even an entire issue, devoted to a single topic. A reasonable question to ask is whether the extra effort of organizing, promoting, and maintaining the special collection is worthwhile. This paper examines paper impact in this journal, the Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics, separating the special collection papers from those not in special collections. The short answer is, on average, yes, at least based on the metric of citations. Some characteristics of the paper were also assessed, such as the use of a colon in the title, the average author team size, the average number of references in each paper, and the paper type of the articles. None of these factors explains the higher average citations and downloads for papers in special collections. In this analysis, though, it was found that several paper types have lower‐than‐average citations but higher‐than‐average downloads, including Commentaries (personal perspectives articles) and Technical Reports (describing new methods or data sets). This implies that such papers are being read but perhaps not heavily referenced (yet). The overall conclusion is that special collections are worth the extra work. Key Points: JGR Space Physics published 51 special collections from 2006 to 2018, totaling 1,009 papers out of 8,881Average citations and downloads are slightly higher for papers in special collections compared to those not in collectionsPaper attributes thought to influence citations were analyzed, finding no statistically significant effect for special collection papers compared to others [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aims to analyze and visualize the top dental papers from 2012 to 2022 using data from essential science indicators (ESIs). Materials and Methods: The present study was conducted using library and retrospective bibliometric analysis methods. Additionally, a science map has been created. Web of Science was searched on January 18, 2023. The results were limited to the top papers in ESIs. The bibliometric information of the top papers was evaluated. Next, the VOSviewer was used to perform a co‐occurrence analysis and visualize data. Results: The findings showed that Mariano Belén Sanz and Maurizio S. Tonetti were the top two authors. The University of London and the University of Bern had the highest number of articles. These articles were published in 55 journals. According to the analysis of keyword co‐occurrence, the most frequently used keywords in the field of dentistry include "periodontitis," "dental implants," "periodontal disease," "mechanical properties," "peri‐implantitis," "oral health," "dental caries," "dental materials," "3D printing." Conclusion: The findings of this study enable readers to pinpoint the authors, organizations, countries, and journals that have made the biggest contributions to the list of the most often cited dentistry papers. In medicine, bibliometric citation analysis is frequently used to assist researchers in learning the fundamentals of a subject and pinpoint subtopics of broad interest for additional study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our understanding of the oxytocin system has been built over the last 70 years by the work of hundreds of scientists, reported in thousands of papers. Here, we construct a map to that literature, using citation network analysis in conjunction with bibliometrics. The map identifies ten major 'clusters' of papers on oxytocin that differ in their particular research focus and that densely cite papers from the same cluster. We identify highly cited papers within each cluster and in each decade, not because citations are a good indicator of quality, but as a guide to recognising what questions were of wide interest at particular times. The clusters differ in their temporal profiles and bibliometric features; here, we attempt to understand the origins of these differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This quali‐quantitative study analysed the 100 most‐cited papers in core dental public health (DPH) journals focusing on understanding international knowledge production. Methods: The DPH journals were selected from titles and scopes at Web of Science Core Collection database up to March 2020. Further comparisons were performed at Scopus and Google Scholar databases. Some bibliometric parameters were extracted as follows: title, number of citations, citation density (number of citations per year), first author's country, year of publication, study design and subject. VOSviewer software was used to create graphical bibliometric maps. Results: Papers were ranked by the total number of citations, which ranged from 104 to 1,019, and six papers were cited more than 400 times. Papers were published from 1974 to 2013, mainly in Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology. Most frequent study designs were cross‐sectional (30%) and nonsystematic review (25%). Most papers were from Europe (54%) and North America (31%). First authors were predominantly from the United Kingdom (17%), United States of America (17%) and Canada (14%). VOSviewer map of co‐authorship demonstrated the existence of clusters in the research collaboration. Although epidemiology was the most frequent subject (84%), health services research presented eight times higher citation density. Conclusions: Top 100 most‐cited papers in core DPH journals were predominantly observational studies from Anglo‐Saxon countries. Top 100 most‐cited papers in core DPH journals tend to be cross‐sectional studies carried out in the United States with highest citation in health services research. Locker D, Petersen PE and Sheiham A are a landmark for DPH field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To maximize its influence, applied behavior analysis must both create solutions and shape public policy to implement those solutions at scale. From the perspective of data-driven decision making, it is illogical to talk about seeking public policy influence without consulting evidence showing when influence has been achieved. One relevant form of evidence is the attention that behavioral solutions receive in published discussions about policy issues, and here I show how much of this attention has been earned by articles published in Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. I also propose using the same kind of data to support finer grained analyses focusing on specific behavior problems, specific types of interventions, and the research programs of individual investigators. Although this is far from a complete account of the influence of applied behavior analysis on policy, it is better to have data than none if the goal is to transform the quest for influence on policy from a matter of speculation and casual discussion into an evidence-based practice., (© 2024 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (SEAB).)

Abstract: High‐impact review papers describe and synthesize the current state of the art, the open questions and controversies, and provide ideas for future investigations. They are written not only for a specific scientific discipline but also for the broader Earth and space science community. They not only summarize the literature, but they also create a framework from which to understand the progress, problems, and connections between different communities, observations, models, and approaches. Here we describe how to write a high‐impact review paper, and why you should consider writing one for Reviews of Geophysics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-English languages are widely used, but their roles in scholarly communication are relatively under-explored. By using Web of Science's Science Citation Index Expanded ( SCIE, 1900-2015), Social Sciences Citation Index ( SSCI, 1900-2015), and Arts and Humanities Citation Index ( A&HCI, 1975-2015), this study probes the patterns and dynamics of non-English papers by year, citation index, and discipline using bibliometric analysis. The analyses show that English is increasingly being used as the dominating language from natural sciences and social sciences to arts and humanities. Around 97% of the papers in SCIE, 95% of the papers in SSCI, and 73% of the papers in A&HCI during the past decade were in English. However, other languages such as German and French were also used as important academic languages in sciences and social sciences during the first half of the 20th century, 1970s, and 1980s. Unlike natural science and social science disciplines, non-English papers have consistently played important role in arts and humanities disciplines from the beginning of 1975. Although the shares of non-English papers in SCIE and SSCI databases have been limited during the past decade, a large number of non-English papers can be found in some applied disciplines of sciences and social sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The number of citations to a refereed journal article from other refereed journal articles is a measure of its impact. Papers, individuals, journals, departments, and institutions are increasingly judged by the impact they have in their disciplines, and citation counts are now a relatively easy (though not necessarily accurate or straightforward) way of attempting to quantify impact. This study examines papers published in the Journal of Geophysical Research—Space Physics in the year 2012 (n = 705) and analyzes the characteristics of high‐citation papers compared to low‐citation papers. We find that high‐citation papers generally have a large number of authors (>5) and cite significantly more articles in the reference section than low‐citation papers. We also examined the gender and country of institution of the first author and found that there is not a statistically significant gender bias, but there are some significant differences in citation statistics between articles based on the country of first‐author institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of COVID‐19 has underlined the need for reliable information to guide clinical practice and policy. This urgency has to be balanced against disruption to journal handling capacity and the continued need to ensure scientific rigour. We examined the reporting quality of highly disseminated COVID‐19 research papers using a bibliometric analysis examining reporting quality and risk of bias (RoB) amongst 250 top scoring Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) COVID‐19 research papers between January and April 2020. Method‐specific RoB tools were used to assess quality. After exclusions, 84 studies from 44 journals were included. Forty‐three (51%) were case series/studies, and only one was an randomized controlled trial. Most authors were from institutions based in China (n = 44, 52%). The median AAS and impact factor was 2015 (interquartile range [IQR] 1,105–4,051.5) and 12.8 (IQR 5–44.2) respectively. Nine studies (11%) utilized a formal reporting framework, 62 (74%) included a funding statement, and 41 (49%) were at high RoB. This review of the most widely disseminated COVID‐19 studies highlights a preponderance of low‐quality case series with few research papers adhering to good standards of reporting. It emphasizes the need for cautious interpretation of research and the increasingly vital responsibility that journals have in ensuring high‐quality publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides a preview of forthcoming papers accepted for publication in the Health Information and Libraries Journal. Topics include the effectiveness of citation searching in urgent and emergency care configuration studies, an alternative screening approach for Google Search in systematic reviews, and the analysis of health information seeking behavior among adolescents.

Background/aim: Dr. Jens Ove Andreasen, the "father" of dental traumatology, passed away on September 26, 2020. As a tribute, the aim of this study was to catalog and analyze the top 100 most-cited papers (co)authored by Dr. Andreasen.Materials and Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted on October 21, 2020, in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS-CC) database. The numbers of citations in the WoS "All Databases" section, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were cross-matched. Two researchers collected the following bibliometric data: title, number of citations, authors, country, year, journals, study design, and theme. The VOSviewer software was used to generate collaborative network maps for the authors and keywords.Results: Of 194 papers identified in WoS-CC, a list was compiled with the 100 most-cited papers (co)authored by Dr. Andreasen. The number of citations of each paper ranged from 24 to 365 (mean: 85.4). Nine papers were cited more than 200 times. Most papers were published in Dental Traumatology (55%), between the 1990's and 2000's (60%), with a laboratory design (40%). One hundred and nine (co)authors, from 19 countries were identified in the top 100 most-cited papers. Dental traumatology was the most studied theme (52%).Conclusions: The top 100 most-cited papers (co)authored by Dr. Jens Ove Andreasen were composed mainly of laboratory and observational studies, published mostly in Dental Traumatology. The present study was a humble homage to highlight the importance of his research and work. However, his legacy goes beyond the numbers and will always remain unsurpassed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined home country bias in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). Bibliographic information of publications in the NEJM from 2000 to 2019 was collected as data. Bibliometric analyses were performed to investigate the number of papers with one or more US‐based authors in the NEJM and compare this to other journals. Citation counts of US‐based and non‐US papers were calculated and compared. The results show that US‐based papers account for 65.44% of the NEJM papers, and the US share of the NEJM papers has remained stable in the examined years whereas in other journals the percentage decreased. More importantly, US‐based papers in the NEJM display significantly lower research impact compared with non‐US papers. The results suggest that US‐based papers are favoured by the NEJM and a home country bias may exist in the publication process of the journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the process of scientific and scholarly communication. Data on open access publications on the Internet not only provides a supplement to the traditional citation indexes but also enables analysis of the microprocesses and daily practices that constitute scientific communication. This article focuses on a stage in the life cycle of scientific and scholarly information that precedes the publication of formal research articles in the scientific and scholarly literature. Binomial logistic regression models are used to analyse precise mechanisms at work in the transformation of a working paper (WP) into a journal article (JA) in the field of economics. The study unveils a fine-grained process of adapting WPs to their new context as JAs by deleting and adding literature references, which perhaps can be best captured by the term sculpting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a follow-up to the highly cited authors list published by Thomson Reuters in June 2014, we analyzed the top 1% most frequently cited papers published between 2002 and 2012 included in the Web of Science ( WoS) subject category 'Information Science & Library Science.' In all, 798 authors contributed to 305 top 1% publications; these authors were employed at 275 institutions. The authors at Harvard University contributed the largest number of papers, when the addresses are whole-number counted. However, Leiden University leads the ranking if fractional counting is used. Twenty-three of the 798 authors were also listed as most highly cited authors by Thomson Reuters in June 2014 (). Twelve of these 23 authors were involved in publishing 4 or more of the 305 papers under study. Analysis of coauthorship relations among the 798 highly cited scientists shows that coauthorships are based on common interests in a specific topic. Three topics were important between 2002 and 2012: (a) collection and exploitation of information in clinical practices; (b) use of the Internet in public communication and commerce; and (c) scientometrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historically, papers have been physically bound to the journal in which they were published; but in the digital age papers are available individually, no longer tied to their respective journals. Hence, papers now can be read and cited based on their own merits, independently of the journal's physical availability, reputation, or impact factor ( IF). We compare the strength of the relationship between journals' IFs and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009. Throughout most of the 20th century, papers' citation rates were increasingly linked to their respective journals' IFs. However, since 1990, the advent of the digital age, the relation between IFs and paper citations has been weakening. This began first in physics, a field that was quick to make the transition into the electronic domain. Furthermore, since 1990 the overall proportion of highly cited papers coming from highly cited journals has been decreasing and, of these highly cited papers, the proportion not coming from highly cited journals has been increasing. Should this pattern continue, it might bring an end to the use of the IF as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers, and researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The most‐cited papers help to better understand important characteristics of this specific science field. Objective: To analyse the 100 most‐cited papers in the field of Paediatric Dentistry. Design: A search of the most‐cited papers in Paediatric Dentistry journals was performed using journals included in the category of 'Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine' in the Thompson Reuters Web of Science citation indexing database up to December 2018. Two researchers performed the data extraction, which included: number of citations, title, authors, country, year, journals, study design, and thematic area. Results: The number of citations of each paper included in the top 100 most‐cited ranged from 42 to 182 (mean: 64.51). Seven papers were cited more than 100 times. Most of the papers were published in the International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry (36%), between 2006 and 2015 (55%), with a cross‐sectional design (39%). Twenty‐six authors participated in two or more papers. The countries with the highest number of most‐cited papers were the United States (25%), Australia (11%), and Brazil (9%). Cariology was the most studied thematic area. Conclusion: The evaluation of the top 100 most‐cited papers in Paediatric Dentistry journals allowed for a better understanding of the world scenario regarding this research field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific progress is driven by important, infrequent discoveries that cannot be readily identified and quantified, which makes research assessment very difficult. Bibliometric indicators of important discoveries have been formulated using an empirical approach, based on the mathematical properties of the high-citation tail of the citation distribution. To investigate the theoretical basis of such formulations this study compares the US/ European research performance ratios expressed in terms of highly cited papers and Nobel Prize-winning discoveries. The research performance ratio in terms of papers was studied from the citation distributions in the fields of chemistry, physics, and biochemistry and molecular biology. It varied as a function of the citation level. Selecting an appropriate high citation level, the ratios in terms of highly cited papers were compared with the corresponding ratios for Nobel Prize-winning discoveries in Chemistry, Physics, and Physiology or Medicine. Research performance ratios expressed in terms of highly cited papers and Nobel Prize-winning discoveries are reasonably similar, and suggest that the research success of the United States is almost 3 times that of Europe. A similar conclusion was obtained using articles published in Nature and Science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This bibliometric analysis aimed to evaluate the leading nations, authors, journals, institutes, highly cited publications, and most commonly used keywords concerning scientific publications based on root and root canal morphology using the CBCT. Material and Methods: For this bibliometric analysis, an extensive search was carried out on September 25, 2023 using the Scopus database. Pertinent articles in the field were scrutinized after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were evaluated using Vosviewer and Microsoft Excel. Results: A literature search revealed the initiation of scientific publication in 2008. Significant contributions made by Saudi Arabia, India, and China concerning the number of publications were seen. Similarly, Jazan University from SA was recognized as the leading institute. The Journal of Endodontics was the leading journal, while authors JNR Martins and G Gambarini produced the highest number of papers. Conclusions: This bibliometric analysis demonstrated that scientific publications have increased tremendously since 2008. Significant contributions have been made by developing and developed nations. The Journal of Endodontics and Jazan University have been identified as the leading journal and institute. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thirty-six ophthalmology journals indexed by the Science Citation Index (SCI) in 2003 were selected to study the role of the 'papers cited rate' in scientific journal evaluation. The 2-year, 3-year, 5-year, 8-year, and 10-year cited rates of these papers were calculated to analyze statistically the correlations with impact factor, 5-year impact factor, immediacy index, eigenfactor score, article influence score, and total cites. The results of questionnaires sent to 8,525 ophthalmologists were used to analyse the correlations between the papers cited rates for different years and traditional bibliometric indicators. The results showed that eigenfactor score and total cites were better than other indicators, and impact factor was better than the 5-year impact factor. The 2-year and 3-year cited rates of papers were reasonable for evaluating science journals, and the 2-year cited rate was better than the 3-year cited rate. The 5-year (and more than 5 years) cited rates were not significant in evaluating science journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The methods presented in this paper allow for a statistical analysis revealing centers of excellence around the world using programs that are freely available. Based on Web of Science data (a fee-based database), field-specific excellence can be identified in cities where highly cited papers were published more frequently than can be expected. Compared to the mapping approaches published hitherto, our approach is more analytically oriented by allowing the assessment of an observed number of excellent papers for a city against the expected number. Top performers in output are cities in which authors are located who publish a statistically significant higher number of highly cited papers than can be expected for these cities. As sample data for physics, chemistry, and psychology show, these cities do not necessarily have a high output of highly cited papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The BRICS countries ( Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) are notable for their increasing participation in science and technology. The governments of these countries have been boosting their investments in research and development to become part of the group of nations doing research at a world-class level. This study investigates the development of the BRICS countries in the domain of top-cited papers (top 10% and 1% most frequently cited papers) between 1990 and 2010. To assess the extent to which these countries have become important players at the top level, we compare the BRICS countries with the top-performing countries worldwide. As the analyses of the (annual) growth rates show, with the exception of Russia, the BRICS countries have increased their output in terms of most frequently cited papers at a higher rate than the top-cited countries worldwide. By way of additional analysis, we generate coauthorship networks among authors of highly cited papers for 4 time points to view changes in BRICS participation (1995, 2000, 2005, and 2010). Here, the results show that all BRICS countries succeeded in becoming part of this network, whereby the Chinese collaboration activities focus on the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study conducts a bibliometric analysis and systematic review of cryptocurrency trading algorithms to identify existing gaps in the area. From our standpoint, this is the first study to carry out a deep analysis of price forecasts and portfolio management in cryptocurrencies in addition to analyzing the most relevant studies and authors, trend topics of the area, and identifying countries with the most published studies. During our research, we identified some gaps that can be used for further research. Currently, there are approximately 16,000 cryptocurrencies; however, in majority of the papers, the authors have only used the top 10 ranking market capitalization cryptocurrencies, leaving aside potential minor cryptocurrencies. Thus, trading strategies using Big Data can be a potential research topic, considering the greater number of emerging cryptocurrencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals with the specific features of historical papers relevant for information retrieval and bibliometrics. The analysis is based mainly on the citation indexes accessible under the Web of Science (WoS) but also on field-specific databases: the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) literature database and the INSPEC database. First, the journal coverage of the WoS (in particular of the WoS Century of Science archive), the limitations of specific search fields as well as several database errors are discussed. Then, the problem of misspelled citations and their 'mutations' is demonstrated by a few typical examples. Complex author names, complicated journal names, and other sources of errors that result from prior citation practice are further issues. Finally, some basic phenomena limiting the meaning of citation counts of historical papers are presented and explained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research offers a thorough examination of Journal of Forecasting (JoF) from two angles. On the one hand, this research examines a total of 1403 publications indexed by Web of Science (WoS) from 1982 to 2019. Not only some fundamental statistics like the number of publications and citations each year, the most prolific countries/regions/authors, the highly cited countries/regions/authors, and papers are counted, but content analysis is also done to look at things like document co‐citation clusters and hot and emerging subjects. On the other hand, to illustrate the knowledge flow of JoF that underlies citation connections, this research, which is based on the citing papers of JoF publications, exposes the direction of JoF knowledge dissemination from Economics and Management (i.e., the categories where JoF belongs) to other categories. Moreover, a deeper investigation on semantic clustering of five representative categories is conducted to figure out what topics are the citing papers of JoF are most interested in and whether there is any relationship between the knowledge of these categories and the knowledge produced by JoF. The framework for journal evaluation presented in this research is novel and comprehensive. With this comprehensive perspective, we are able to look back on past accomplishments, identify historical patterns of knowledge spread, illustrate the current course of development, and partially predict future dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: After conducting a comprehensive literature search of two medical electronic databases, PubMed and Embase, as well as two citation databases, Web of Science Core Collections (WoS) and Scopus, we aimed to conduct an Altmetric and Scientometric analysis of the History of Medicine literature in medical research. Methods: The following software tools were used for analyzing the retrieved records from PubMed and Embase databases and conducting a collaboration analysis to identify the countries involved in scientific medical papers, as well as clustering keywords to reveal the trend of History of Medicine research for the future. These software tools (VOSviewer 1.6.18 and Spss 16) allowed the researchers to visualize bibliometric networks, perform statistical analysis, and identify patterns and trends in the data. Results: Our analysis revealed 53,771 records from PubMed and 54,405 records from EMBASE databases retrieved in the field of History of Medicine by 105,286 contributed authors in WoS. We identified 157 countries that collaborated on scientific medical papers. By clustering 59,995 keywords, we were able to reveal the trend of History of Medicine research for the future. Our findings showed a positive association between traditional bibliometrics and social media metrics such as the Altmetric Attention Score in the History of Medicine literature (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Sharing research findings of articles in social scientific networks will increase the visibility of scientific works in History of Medicine research, which is one of the most important factors influencing the citation of articles. Additionally, our overview of the literature in the medical field allowed us to identify and examine gaps in the History of Medicine research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bibliometric analysis explores large volume of scientific data, revealing trends and insights in a specific research field. Consistently, a bibliometric analysis of 30 years (1990–2020) was performed within the US corn (Zea mays L.) production using the Scopus database and VOSviewer. Search query was performed within the article title, abstract, and keywords indicative of management practices in corn. Exclusion criterion based on subject area and journals generated a total of 7468 publications. The data analysis revealed contributions from 7327 authors and 47 organizations documented in 69 journals. The top five organizations leading the investigation were United States Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service, Iowa State University, University of Nebraska, University of Illinois, and Purdue University. The most prolific authors were Dr. Rattan Lal (Ohio State University, Columbus, OH), Dr. Douglas L. Karlen (USDA‐ARS, Ames, IA), Dr. Kenneth G. Cassman (University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE), Dr. Lajpat Rai Ahuja (USDA‐ARS, Ft. Collins, CO), and Dr. John Walsh Doran (USDA‐ARS, Lincoln, NE). Journals with most publications were Agronomy Journal; Soil Science Society of America Journal; Soil and Tillage Research; Crop Science; and Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Furthermore, author keywords differed from queried keywords, and no‐till, nitrogen, cover crop, soybean, irrigation, phosphorus, conservation tillage, yield, and water quality were most prominent. Moreover, there was an evident shift in keywords and an observed trend between 1998 and 2020. Overall, these findings allow researchers to explore network maps via the hyperlinks present in papers, identifying research gaps and advancing original studies to bridge gaps in the literature. Core Ideas: There has been a consistent increase in corn research in last 30 years.United States Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service (USDA‐ARS) was the top funding sponsor and leading investigator.Queried keywords differed from author keywords, and a trend was observed in their use.The top journal with most publications on corn production was Agronomy Journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A central issue in evaluative bibliometrics is the characterization of the citation distribution of papers in the scientific literature. Here, we perform a large-scale empirical analysis of journals from every field in Thomson Reuters' Web of Science database. We find that only 30 of the 2,184 journals have citation distributions that are inconsistent with a discrete lognormal distribution at the rejection threshold that controls the false discovery rate at 0.05. We find that large, multidisciplinary journals are over-represented in this set of 30 journals, leading us to conclude that, within a discipline, citation distributions are lognormal. Our results strongly suggest that the discrete lognormal distribution is a globally accurate model for the distribution of “eventual impact” of scientific papers published in single-discipline journal in a single year that is removed sufficiently from the present date. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ERGUL, S., ARDAHAN, M., TEMEL, A.B. & YILDIRIM, B.Ö. (2010) Bibliometric review of references of nursing research papers during the decade 1994–2003 in Turkey. International Nursing Review 57, 49–55 Aim: To identify important information on the state of academic nursing and the characteristics of academic nursing publications in Turkey. Methods: The study consists of retrospective bibliometric research. The selected sample of the research consisted of six Turkish nursing journals published between 1994–2003 from a total population of ten journals. Seventy-four issues of these six journals were included and 825 research papers were analysed. A series of classic bibliometric indexes were used. Results: The average number of references per scientific paper is 16.19 [±standard deviation (SD) 8.56]. The changes in the number of references taken from journals over time do not show strong fluctuations but were statistically significant ( P < 0.001). The average number of references per paper is 17.71 (±SD 8.09) for research papers, while it is 14.50 (±SD 8.76) for reviews. The Price's index is 23.8% and the insularity index is 31.8%. Conclusions: The number of references used for papers has been increasing in recent years. The use of journals within references is high while the use of books is low. The Price's index tendency is decreasing. The high insularity index observed in the articles may be considered as a negative indicator of nursing journals in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the publication of Robert K. Merton's theory of cumulative advantage in science (Matthew Effect), several empirical studies have tried to measure its presence at the level of papers, individual researchers, institutions, or countries. However, these studies seldom control for the intrinsic “quality” of papers or of researchers—“better” (however defined) papers or researchers could receive higher citation rates because they are indeed of better quality. Using an original method for controlling the intrinsic value of papers—identical duplicate papers published in different journals with different impact factors—this paper shows that the journal in which papers are published have a strong influence on their citation rates, as duplicate papers published in high-impact journals obtain, on average, twice as many citations as their identical counterparts published in journals with lower impact factors. The intrinsic value of a paper is thus not the only reason a given paper gets cited or not, there is a specific Matthew Effect attached to journals and this gives to papers published there an added value over and above their intrinsic quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bibliometric analysis was performed to study the development of publications related to Industry 4.0 and its key technologies in Vietnam. Comparisons with data from other ASEAN countries, and with global data have been done to identify distinctive characteristics of Industry 4.0 literature from Vietnam. The collection of 1,470 retrieved papers was analysed to answer seven research questions. Our results highlighted some valuable insights of Industry 4.0 literature in Vietnam. The number of papers in Industry 4.0 in Vietnam increased rapidly in recent years, mostly focused on Computer Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Iran, China, and South Korea were the most productive partner countries with Vietnam in Industry 4.0. Machine learning, artificial intelligence, big data, deep learning, Internet of things, neural networks, and data mining were among the most popular research themes in Industry 4.0 in Vietnam. Vietnam ranked third among 10 Southeast Asian countries, based on the number of published papers in Industry 4.0, but the gap with the two top countries was large. Compared to the global data, the annual growth rate of Industry 4.0 papers in Vietnam, and other Southeast Asian countries was lower. Findings from this work can be helpful for other scholars in establishing potential future research lines related to Industry 4.0 in Vietnam. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ferroptosis is a newly characterized form of regulated cell death. This bibliometric analysis identified the scientific output, leading institutions and research teams, current research hotspots and trends in research on ferroptosis since the origin of the concept. We searched the Science Citation Index Expanded of Web of Science Core Collection for papers on ferroptosis up to 3 June 2022. The acquired data were analysed and visualized by Bibliometrix package and VOSviewer. The study ultimately included 3511 relevant papers, and annual production in this field has grown rapidly in recent years. Institutions and scholars from China contributed the most work, but the impact of their research was much less than that of the United States. Prof. Brent R. Stockwell's team from Columbia University in the United States has a very strong academic influence in the field. Front Cell Dev Biol published the most papers in the field of ferroptosis. As the keywords of the papers in this field changed from the most numerous 'oxidative stress', 'cell‐death', 'iron', 'expression', and 'lipid‐peroxidation', to 'prognosis', 'immunotherapy', 'progression', 'tumour microenvironment', and 'colorectal cancer', the hotspot of ferroptosis research is gradually shifting from basic research to clinical translational research. The mechanism of tumour formation and treatment will become the frontier in the field of ferroptosis research in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Garfield (Impact) Factor (GF) is one of the most frequently used scientometric indicators. In the present article it is shown that the main factors determining the value, of the mean of representing a set of journals are the number of articles published recently (articles referencing) Sated to those published in a previous time period (articles to be referenced) and the mean number of references in journal papers referring to the time period selected. It has been proved further that OF corresponds to the mean chance for citedness of journal papers. A new indicator, specific Impact Contribution (SIC), is Introduced, which characterizes the contribution of a subset of articles or a journal to the total impact of the respective articles or journals. The SIC index relates the share of a journal in citations divided by that in publications within a set of papers or journals appropriately selected. It is shown, however, that the normalized GFs of journals and the normalized SIC indicators are identical measures within any set of journals Selected. It may be stated therefore that Garfield Factors of journals (calculated correctly) are appropriate scientometric measures for characterizing the relative International eminence of journals within a set of journals appropriately selected. ft Is demonstrated further that SIC indicators (and so GF Indexes) correspond to the (number of citations per paper) indicators generally used, within the same set of papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]