A Bibliometric Analysis of Evaluative Medical Education Studies

Sampson, Margaret; Horsley, Tanya; Doja, Asif

doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3182820b5c

Cited by 25 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10 The philosophy behind indexing is that the content and format of each item are fully and adequately described, and articles are indexed by their most specific term, with Major MeSH terms representing the main topic of the article and other MeSH terms representing additional concepts. 10 Although a standardized procedure for indexing articles in MEDLINE is in place, indexing inconsistencies have been found both for MeSH term assignment 3,21-24 and for study-type indexing, 25,26 essentially in result of the indexing process being ultimately subject to individual interpretation. This was shown in a report that identified a 48% consistency rate among catalogers in the assignment of main MeSH terms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Quality of pharmacy-specific Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) assignment in pharmacy journals indexed in MEDLINE

Minguet

Salgado

Boogerd

et al. 2015

Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Quality of pharmacy-specific Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) assignment in pharmacy journals indexed in MEDLINE

Minguet

Salgado

Boogerd

et al. 2015

Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To this end, BEME reports a 50% increase in the number of reviews undertaken by authors over a recent five-year period. 9 Over the last decade, broad bibliometric reviews of the literature have been undertaken to identify trends in medical education publishing, [10][11][12] recognize the most cited articles in the field, 13 characterize author networks across international borders, 14 and describe associated social media attention. 15,16 While these studies provide important insights into the overall landscape of the medical education literature, they fail to fully illuminate knowledge syntheses and their characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis

Maggio

Costello

Norton

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future. In particular, this analysis details the venues in which knowledge syntheses are published, the types of syntheses conducted, citation rates they produce, and altmetric attention they garner. MethodIn 2020, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of knowledge syntheses published in 14 core medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. To characterize the studies, metadata was extracted from Pubmed, Web of Science, Altmetrics Explorer, and Unpaywall. ResultsThe authors analyzed 963 knowledge syntheses representing 3.1% of total articles published (n=30,597). On average, 45.9 knowledge syntheses were published annually (SD=35.85, Median=33), and there was an overall 2,620% increase in the number of knowledge syntheses published from 1999 to 2019. The journals each published, on average, a total of 68.8 knowledge syntheses (SD=67.2, Median=41) with Medical Education publishing the most (n=189; 19%). Twenty-one knowledge synthesis types were identified; the most prevalent types were systematic reviews (n=341; 35.4%) and scoping reviews (n=88; 9.1%). Knowledge syntheses were cited an average of 53.80 times (SD=107.12, Median=19) and received a mean Altmetric Attention Score of 14.12 (SD=37.59, Median=6). ConclusionsThere has been considerable growth in knowledge syntheses in medical education over the past 20 years, contributing to medical education's evidence base. Beyond this increase in volume, researchers have introduced methodological diversity in these publications, and the community has taken to social media to share knowledge syntheses. Implications for the field, including the impact of synthesis types and their relationship to knowledge translation, are discussed.

show abstract

“…While the above studies provide cursory insights into medical education research patterns, both are limited in that they examined only a narrow subset of medical education journals (likely introducing selection bias) as well as omitting non-medical education journals (e.g. general medicine and subspecialty journals), which are known to frequently publish medical education research [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Productivity in medical education research: an examination of countries of origin

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundProductivity and countries of origin of publications within the field of medical education research have not been explored. Using bibliometric techniques we conducted an analysis of studies evaluating medical education interventions, examining the country where research originated as well as networks of authors within countries identified as ‘most productive’.MethodsPubMed was used to search for evaluative studies of medical education. We then examined relative productivity of countries with >100 publications in our sample (number of publications/number of medical schools in country). Author networks from the top 2 countries with the highest relative productivity were constructed.Results6874 publications from 18,883 different authors were included. The countries with the highest relative publication productivity were Canada (37.1), Netherlands (28.3), New Zealand (27), the UK (23), and the U.S.A (17.1). Author collaboration networks differed in both numbers of authors and intensity of collaborations in the countries with highest relative productivity.ConclusionsIn terms of the number of publications of evaluative studies in medical education, Canadawas the country with the highest relative productivity. Author networks allow for the identification of ongoing and potential new collaborations amongst authors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-014-0243-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

A Bibliometric Analysis of Evaluative Medical Education Studies

Cited by 25 publications

References 15 publications

Quality of pharmacy-specific Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) assignment in pharmacy journals indexed in MEDLINE

Quality of pharmacy-specific Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) assignment in pharmacy journals indexed in MEDLINE

Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis

Productivity in medical education research: an examination of countries of origin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About