Background and aim An Aphrodisiac includes any drug and food that arouses sexual instinct, induces venereal desire, and increases pleasure and performance. The present study was designed to clinically evaluate efficacy and safety of Herbal Based Syrup (HBS) composed of Tribulus terrestris L., Panax ginseng C.A. Meyer., Zingiber officinale Rosc, Ceratonia siliqua L., Papaver rhoeas L., and Palm tree pollen on sexual experience of men. Experimental procedure The study was designed as a double-blind randomized clinical trial. The main outcome measures were the responses obtained from using the Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX). The ASEX was completed by 100 married and seemingly healthy men before and after taking one dose of HBS or placebo and at least one sexual intercourse. In addition, possible side effects were observed. A split-plot ANOVA (SPANOVA) design was used for statistical analysis. Results Results of analysis of data for each variable of the ASEX showed significantly lower scores in HBS-treated group compared to the placebo (control) group in items of desire, arousal, erection, orgasm and satisfaction (p < 0.05). No drug-related serious adverse events were observed. Conclusion Results of this study indicated a significant improvement in sexual experience of men following consumption of HBS. Due to various complications reported about the use of chemical sexual drive enhancers, HBS can be introduced as an alternative with fewer side effects.
PurposeUsing science mapping analysis approach and co-word analysis, the present study explores and visualizes research fields and thematic evolution of the coronavirus. Based on this method, one can get a picture of the real content of the themes in the mentioned thematic area and identify the main minor and emerging themes.Design/methodology/approachThis study was conducted based on co-word science mapping analysis under a longitudinal study (from 1988 to 2020). The collection of documents in this study was further divided into three subperiods: 1988–1998, 1999–2009 and 2010–2020. In order to perform science mapping analysis based on co-word bibliographic networks, SciMAT was utilized as a bibliometric tool. Moreover, WoS, PubMed and Scopus bibliographic databases were used to download all records.FindingsIn this study, strategic diagrams were demonstrated for the coronavirus research for a chronological period to assess the most relevant themes. Each diagram depended on the sum of documents linked to each research topic. In the first period (1988–1998), the most centralizations were on virology and evaluation of coronavirus structure and its structural and nonstructural proteins. In the second period (1999–2009), with due attention to high population density in eastern Asia and the increasing number of people affected with the new generation of coronavirus (named severe acute respiratory syndrome virus or SARS virus), publications have been concentrated on “antiviral activity.” In the third period (2010–2020), there was a tendency to investigate clinical syndromes, and most of the publications and citations were about hot topics like “severe acute respiratory syndrome,” “coronavirus” and “respiratory tract disease.” Scientometric analysis of the field of coronavirus can be regarded as a roadmap for future research and policymaking in this important area.Originality/valueThe originality of this research can be considered in two ways. First, the strategic diagrams of coronavirus are drawn in four thematic areas including motor cluster, basic and transversal cluster, highly developed cluster and emerging and declining cluster. Second, COVID-19 is mentioned as a hot topic of research.
Aim: To add to previous analyses and describe the trends in MSA research from three decades, 1988 to 2018, through assessing the medical literature. Additionally, a collaboration network was analyzed to determine the most common process in development of MSA research. Methods: This research was a descriptive survey with a scientometric approach. The data for the present study were collected from the Web of Science (WoS) and search strategy based on Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) term. In this research, the data analysis was performed based on collaboration network and theme analysis. Results and Conclusion: In this study, 6530 articles were retrieved from 1988 to 2018 in three different periods. These articles were drafted by 39,184 authors, 3,865 organizations, 80 countries, and 832 journals. Further, 287 articles with more than 100 citations were found. The global citation score (GCS) was 250,834 times and the average cited times per articles was reported as 3,841. The MSA research field demonstrated a diagram for a chronological period to assess the most relevant themes. Each diagram depended on the sum of documents linked to each research topic. Scientometric analysis of the field of MSA can be regarded as a roadmap for future research and policymaking in this important area.
Background One of the requirements for scientists and researchers to enter any field of science is to have a comprehensive and accurate understanding of that discipline. Objective This study aims to draw a science map, provide structural analysis, explore the evolution, and determine new trends in research articles published in the field of breast cancer. Methods This study comprised a descriptive survey with a scientometric approach. Data were collected from MEDLINE using a search strategy based on Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms. This study used science mapping, which provides a visual representation and a longitudinal evolution of possible interrelations between scientific areas, documents, or authors, thus reflecting the cognitive architecture of science mapping. For this scientometric evaluation of the topic of breast cancer research, a very long period was considered for data collection. Moreover, due to the availability of numerous publications in the database, the assessment was divided into three different periods ranging from 1988 to 2020. Results A total of 12,577 records related to scientometric studies were extracted. The field of breast cancer research demonstrated three diagrams containing the most relevant themes for the three chronological periods evaluated. Each diagram was plotted based on the centrality and density linked to each research topic. The research output in the field was observed to revolve around 8 areas or themes: radiation injury, cardiovascular disease, fibroadenoma, antineoplastic agent, estrogen antagonistic, immunohistochemistry, soybean, and epitopes, each represented with different colors. Conclusions In the strategic diagrams, the themes were both well developed and important for the structuring of a research field. The first quadrant comprised motor themes of the specialty, which present strong centrality and high density (eg, corticosteroid antineoplastic age, stem cell, T-lymphocyte, protein tyrosine kinase, dietary, and phosphatidyl inositol-3-kinase). In the second quadrant of diagram, themes have well-developed internal ties but unimportant external ties, as they are of only marginal importance for the field. These themes are very specialized and peripheral (eg, DNA-binding). In the third quadrant, themes are both weakly developed and marginal. The themes in this quadrant have low density and centrality and mainly represent either emerging or declining themes (eg, ovarian neoplasm). Themes in the fourth quadrant of the strategic diagram are considered important for a research field but are not fully developed. This quadrant contains transversal and general, basic themes (eg, immunohistochemistry). Scientometric analysis of breast cancer research can be regarded as a roadmap for future research and policymaking for this important field.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.