A new approach to defining a multidisciplinary field of science: The case of cardiovascular biology

Rogers, Lauren A.; Anderson, John A.

doi:10.1007/bf02016285

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other multidisciplinary fields, bibliometric studies have been conducted to identify all journals where related work may be published (e.g. Drago and Kashian [18]), and methodologies have been proposed for defining the scope of a multidisciplinary research area for bibliometric analysis using subject headings [19, 20]. More recent reviews of multidisciplinary fields employ keyword searches of article databases using lists of keywords and sub-areas agreed upon by domain experts [21], or perform a very broad keyword search followed by a thematic analysis to determine the sub-areas [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is particularly difficult to define the scope of gambling studies not only because of the diverse antecedents to harmful gambling, but also because problem gambling is almost always associated with multiple, complex, and diverse comorbid disorders [23–26]. Earlier review methods proposed by Rogers and Anderson [19] rely on using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), which, if applied to gambling, would not account for research outside the medical context. Whilst traditional disciplines have established vocabularies and subject headings to assess the scientific outputs of the field (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A mapping review of research on gambling harm in three regulatory environments

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHarmful gambling is a complex issue with diverse antecedents and resulting harms that have been studied from multiple disciplinary perspectives. Although previous bibliometric reviews of gambling studies have found a dominance of judgement and decision-making research, no bibliometric review has examined the concept of “harm” in the gambling literature, and little work has quantitatively assessed how gambling research priorities differ between countries.MethodsGuided by the Conceptual Framework of Harmful Gambling (CFHG), an internationally relevant framework of antecedents to harmful gambling, we conducted a bibliometric analysis focusing on research outputs from three countries with different gambling regulatory environments: Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Using a Web of Science database search, 1424 articles published from 2008 to 2017 were retrieved that could be mapped to the eight CFHG factors. A subsample of articles (n = 171) containing the word “harm” in the title, abstract, or keywords was then drawn. Descriptive statistics were used to examine differences between countries and trends over time with regard to CFHG factor and harm focus.ResultsPsychological and biological factors dominate gambling research in Canada whereas resources and treatment have received more attention in New Zealand. A greater percentage of Australia and New Zealand publications address the gambling environment and exposure to gambling than in Canada. The subset of articles focused on harm showed a stronger harms focus among New Zealand and Australian researchers compared to Canadian-authored publications.ConclusionsThe findings provide preliminary bibliometric evidence that gambling research foci may be shaped by jurisdictional regulation of gambling. Countries with privately operated gambling focused on harm factors that are the operators’ responsibility, whereas jurisdictions with a public health model focused on treatment and harm reduction resources. In the absence of a legislated requirement for public health or harm minimisation focus, researchers in jurisdictions with government-operated gambling tend to focus research on factors that are the individual’s responsibility and less on the harms they experience. Given increased international attention to gambling-related harm, regulatory and research environments could promote and support more diverse research in this area.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A mapping review of research on gambling harm in three regulatory environments

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The completeness of the bibliography is dependent on the ability of the bibliographers to monitor the literature and discover the relevant sources (and may be an indication of his or her breadth of communication ties in the field). Second, developers of bibliographic databases define subject literatures broadly in their scope statements and lists of sources covered, while catalogers and indexers create finer-grained literatures by tagging journal and article records with the appropriate classification terms and codes or by assigning multiple subject headings or thesaurus terms to the article record.3 Thus we can define the journal literature of superconductivity (Brooks, 1989) as those journal articles indexed with the appropriate thesaurus terms in the INSPEC database or the literature of cardiovascular disease as those articles indexed with the relevant range of Medical Subject Headings in MEDLINE (Rogers & Anderson, 1993). Finally, authors create literatures as they cite prior work that is relevant to their own.…”

Section: College Of Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotechnology in context: A database-filtering approach to identifying core and productive non-core journals supporting multidisciplinary R & D

McCain

1995

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eighty‐nine journals were identified as potentially important journals supporting biotechnology R&D through the analysis of journal citation networks (1991 Journal Citation Reports). Twelve research areas emerged: one set of linked intercitation clusters representing the central areas of concern—biotechnology, microbiology, molecular genetics, food science and technology, and plant science. Organic chemistry and natural products research comprised a linked pair, while the remainder, horticulture, pharmaceutical science, chemical engineering, biosensors, and water research remained single clusters. Mapping and clustering of cocitation data (1988–1992 SCISEARCH) displayed a similar structure, with the clusters arranged along a basic (natural science)—applied research (engineering) continuum. A subject indexing profile analysis (Biotechnology Abstracts, 1990–1992) showed that journals in pharmaceutical science, organic chemistry, and natural products rarely if ever published biotechnology‐relevant research. In a productivity analysis, the two top categories (70% coverage—12 titles; 30%–69% coverage—14 titles) included 10 journals not classed as biotechnology by Journal Citation Reports. One of these, Plant Cell Reports (88% coverage), has not been listed as a biotechnology journal in any previous core lists. This database filtering approach, combining citation, indexing, and productivity analyses, is an effective tool for identifying important non‐core journals supporting multidisciplinary R&D. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

show abstract

“…Este artigo busca dar uma contribuição metodológica a exatamente essa questão, ou seja, como delimitar dentro da base de publicações do Science Citation Index uma área multidisciplinar; neste caso, a área de bioprospecção. Delimitar, dentro de uma base de publicações, uma área multidisciplinar, para análise bibliométrica, significa definir os limites de tal área a partir da identificação dos artigos científicos que sejam reconhecíveis, pelos praticantes desta área, como contendo resultados de pesquisas que são de seu interesse direto (Rogers;Anderson, 1993). Mais especificamente para o nosso caso, delimitar a área de bioprospecção no Science Citation Index foi um exercício de definir os critérios pelos quais alguns artigos dentro da área disciplinar de Química de Produtos Naturais, por exemplo, deveriam ser incluídos na área multidisciplinar de bioprospecção e outros, não.…”

unclassified

Delimitação de uma área multidisciplinar para análise bibliométrica de produção científica: o caso da Bioprospecção

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Os indicadores bibliométricos em ciência e tecnologia surgem da necessidade de mensuração da produção das instituições científica, partindo da premissa de que a ciência se encontra, em grande parte, incorporada em sua literatura. Como a ciência torna-se cada vez mais multidisciplinar, uma das principais dificuldades da análise bibliométrica tem sido a construção de indicadores de áreas com essa característica. Isso ocorre porque as bases de dados científicas adotam uma classificação própria de áreas, subáreas e disciplinas científicas e atribuem tais classificações aos periódicos. Este trabalho insere-se nesse contexto, contribuindo especificamente para a delimitação e construção de indicadores de uma área científica de atividade caracteristicamente multidisciplinar, a bioprospecção. Esta área de conhecimento vem se destacando na esfera política e econômica dos últimos anos. Os resultados deste estudo demonstram ainda a importância dessa área no meio acadêmico, ao comprovar o crescimento da área pelo número de artigos publicados, de disciplinas envolvidas, dos principais periódicos e das instituições de pesquisa que se destacam na produção dos conhecimentos multidisciplinares da bioprospecção.

show abstract

A new approach to defining a multidisciplinary field of science: The case of cardiovascular biology

Cited by 6 publications

References 17 publications

A mapping review of research on gambling harm in three regulatory environments

A mapping review of research on gambling harm in three regulatory environments

Biotechnology in context: A database-filtering approach to identifying core and productive non-core journals supporting multidisciplinary R & D

Delimitação de uma área multidisciplinar para análise bibliométrica de produção científica: o caso da Bioprospecção

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About