A Bibliometric Analysis of COVID-19 Research Activity: A Call for Increased Output

Chahrour, Mohamad; Assi, Sahar; Bejjani, Michael; Nasrallah, Antoine; Salhab, Hamza A.; Fares, Mohamad Y.; Khachfe, Hussein H.

doi:10.7759/cureus.7357

Cited by 262 publications

(291 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

238

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged at the end of December 2019 in Wuhan city of China [1]. The initial outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan spread rapidly, affecting other parts of China.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closure of Universities Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on Education and Mental Health of Students and Academic Staff

Sahu

2020

Cureus

1,818

1,597

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closure of Universities Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on Education and Mental Health of Students and Academic Staff

Sahu

2020

Cureus

1,818

1,597

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…More recently, two early analyses of COVID-19 research found that most data were generated from China and called for increased academic output, particularly in the form of interventional trials of new treatments [11,12]. As suggested by the previous EVD response and the current data, this must be done with global coordination and in the spirit of open science.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global academic response to COVID-19: Cross-sectional study

Helliwell

Bolton

Burke

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe the global academic response to COVID-19 during its early stages. The responsiveness of investigators, editorial teams, and publishers was explored.Design: Cross-sectional bibliometric review of COVID-19 literature. A parallel search of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) literature was performed for comparison of outcomes.Most COVID-19 studies were clinical reports (n=242; 60.8%) and the majority of these were case series (n=105; 43.4%) and single cases (n=65; 26.9%). The times from manuscript submission to acceptance (median: 5 days (IQR: 3-11) vs 71.5 days (38-106); P<0.001) and acceptance to publication (median: 5 days (IQR: 2-8) vs. 22.5 days (4-48.5-; P<0.001) were strikingly shorter for COVID-19. Almost all COVID-19 (n=396; 99.5%) and MERS (n=55; 100%) studies were available with open-access. Data sharing was infrequent, with original data available for 104 (26.1%) COVID-19 and 10 (18.2%) MERS studies (P=0.203). Conclusions:The early academic response to COVID-19 was characterised by investigators aiming to define the disease. These studies were made rapidly and openly available by editorial and publishing teams. Data sharing practises are an essential target for improvement as the pandemic progresses.

show abstract

“…Many other European, Asian, African, and North and South American countries have been reporting cases [6]. Nevertheless, the Middle East countries have been lagging in terms of publishing clinical outcomes [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%