Scientists’ response to global public health emergencies: A bibliometrics perspective

Wu, Leyan; Yang, Jinqing; Wang, Dan; Cheng, Qiuming; Lu, Wei

doi:10.1177/01655515211030866

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the pandemic progressed, bibliometric assessments on a wide range of issues were published in COVID-19. [21][22][23][24] A bibliometric analysis serves as the foundation for determining the most significant publications and publishing trends in a particular field of interest. They were carried out to determine the key topics of the research chronology, the most respected publications, institutes, and prolific contributing countries in a given subject.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunction in COVID-19: A Global Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis

Zyoud

Shakhshir

Koni

et al. 2022

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Coronavirus illness (COVID-19) has been found to alter infected people’s sense of smell and taste. However, the pathobiology of this virus is not yet known. Therefore, it is critical to investigate the influence of COVID-19 infection on olfactory and gustatory processes. Therefore, we use bibliometric analysis on COVID-19 and olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction publications to provide studies perspective. Methods: A bibliometric literature search was performed in the Scopus database. The number and type of publications, countries for publications, institutional sources for publications, journals for publications, citation patterns, and funding agencies were analyzed using Microsoft Excel or VOSviewer. In addition, the VOSviewer 1.6.17 software was used to analyze and visualize hotspots and collaboration patterns between countries. Results: Scopus has published 187 088 documents for COVID-19 in all study fields at the time of data collection (July 26, 2021). A total of 1740 documents related to olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction were recovered. The countries most relevant by the number of publications were the United States (n = 362, 20.80%), Italy (n = 255, 14.66%), and the United Kingdom (n = 173, 9.94%). By analyzing the terms in the titles and abstracts, we identified 2 clusters related to olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction research, which are “diagnosis and test methods” and “prognosis and complications of the disease.” Conclusions: This is the first bibliometric analysis of publications related to COVID-19 and olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction. This study provides academics and researchers with useful information on the publishing patterns of the most influential publications on COVID-19 and olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction. Olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction as indices of suspicion for the empirical diagnosis of coronavirus infection is a new hotspot in this field.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunction in COVID-19: A Global Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis

Zyoud

Shakhshir

Koni

et al. 2022

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, these three aspects play vital roles in determining the impact of the crisis and the recovery times for a country [3]. Many studies have looked at the changing patterns of academic activity globally during times of crisis [4][5][6][7][8]. Now we need to understand academic responses and contributions from countries with varying levels of development and research capabilities, as this is the interface where urgent health needs meet science.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Fry et al [33], the geographic loci of coronavirus research generally, as well as the structure of academic teams, were shifted by the onset of COVID-19. Yet, although most studies on COVID-19 involve some collaborative analysis [6,7,22], little attention has been given to examining the collaboration patterns, particularly among countries at various HDI levels and during different stages of the pandemic’s spread. In a prior study on long-standing infectious and parasitic diseases (IPDs) that caused epidemics in undeveloped areas, scholars verified that collaborations between highly developed nations and those regions suffering most from IPDs are often intensive [34].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How has academia responded to the urgent needs created by COVID-19? A multi-level global, regional and national analysis

Zhao

Zhang

Wang

et al. 2022

Journal of Information Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, gaining insights into how academia has responded to this urgent challenge is of great significance. This article presents academic response patterns at a global, regional and national level from an analysis of publication volume versus reported cases of COVID-19, scientific collaboration and research focus. We also compare academic activity associated with this newly emerging infection to that related to long-standing infections. Our results show that the research community has responded quickly to COVID-19. The highly developed countries, which have the highest number of confirmed cases, are also the major academic contributors. National-level analysis reveals diverse response patterns from different countries. Specifically, academic research in the United Kingdom remained at a relatively constant level throughout the whole year (2020), while the global share of China’s research output was prone to shift as its domestic pandemic status changed. Strong alliances have formed among countries with academic capabilities in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The distribution of disciplines is relatively decentralised, indicating that a diverse and broad knowledge base contributes to the COVID-19 literature. Most of the analysed countries show dynamic patterns of research focus that vary over time as the pandemic evolves, except India. As one of the world’s biggest suppliers of vaccines, India makes consistent efforts on vaccine research, especially those related to pharmaceutical preparations. Our findings may serve as resources for fostering strategies to respond to future threats of pandemics.

show abstract

“…In the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, international collaborations accounted for 19.6% of publications. In the early years of an epidemic, international collaborations tend to be low, as seen with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in 2003, Influenza A (H1N1) in 2009, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2012, and the Ebola outbreak in 2014 (Wu et al, 2021 ). Collaboration increased over time, reaching 25% for H1N1, 30% for SARS, up to 42% for MERS, and 50% for Ebola (Wu et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership and international collaboration on COVID-19 research: reducing the North–South divide?

Carvalho,

Felipe,

Albuquerque

et al. 2023

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented scientific efforts worldwide and launched several initiatives to promote international cooperation. Because international scientific collaborations between high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are not always balanced, analyzing research leadership helps to understand the global dynamics of knowledge production during COVID-19. In this study, we focused on HIC–LMIC collaborations on COVID-19 research in 469,937 scientific publications during the first 2 years of the pandemic (2020–2021). Co-authorship and authors’ affiliation were used to identify international collaborations, according to country income level. The leadership analysis considered the countries of the first and last authors of publications. The results show that (i) most publications with international collaborations (49.3%) involved researchers from HICs and LMICs; (ii) collaborative research between HICs and LMICs addressed relevant public health needs; (iii) HIC–LMIC collaborations were primarily led by researchers from the United States, China, the United Kingdom, and India; (iv) most HIC–LMIC publications (44%) had shared leadership, with research interests linked to national expertise and global interests. This study contributes to the analysis of research collaborations on COVID-19 and sheds light on North–South relations in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge.

show abstract

Scientists’ response to global public health emergencies: A bibliometrics perspective

Cited by 8 publications

References 38 publications

Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunction in COVID-19: A Global Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis

Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunction in COVID-19: A Global Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis

How has academia responded to the urgent needs created by COVID-19? A multi-level global, regional and national analysis

Leadership and international collaboration on COVID-19 research: reducing the North–South divide?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About