Worldwide research productivity of paracetamol (acetaminophen) poisoning

Zyoud, Sa’ed H.; Al-Jabi, Samah W.; Sweileh, WM

doi:10.1177/0960327114531993

Cited by 87 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study is not without limitations, most of which are the same as those of bibliometric studies performed in other biomedical fields [23,24,29-31]. First of all, in the current study, we used Scopus criteria for including EC-related keywords.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Worldwide research productivity in the field of electronic cigarette: a bibliometric analysis

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundElectronic cigarette (EC) is an emerging phenomenon that is becoming increasingly popular with smokers worldwide. There is a lack of data concerning the evaluation of research productivity in the field of EC originating from the world. The main objectives of this study were to analyse worldwide research output in EC field, and to examine the authorship pattern and the citations retrieved from the Scopus database.MethodsData were searched for documents with specific words regarding EC as “keywords” in the title. Scientific output was evaluated based on the methodology developed and used in other bibliometric studies by investigation: (a) total and trends of contributions in EC research during all previous years up to the date of data analysis (June 13, 2014); (b) authorship patterns and research productivity; (c) countries contribution; and (d) citations received by the publications.ResultsThree hundred and fifty-six documents were retrieved comprising 31.5% original journal articles, 16% letters to the editor, 7.9% review articles, and 44.6% documents that were classified as other types of publications, such as notes or editorials or opinions. The retrieved documents were published in 162 peer-reviewed journals. All retrieved documents were published from 27 countries. the largest number of publications in the field of EC was from the United States of America (USA); (33.7%), followed by the United Kingdom (UK); (11.5%), and Italy (8.1%). The total number of citations at the time of data analysis was 2.277, with an average of 6.4 citations per document and median (interquartile range) of 0.0 (0.0–5.0). The h-index of the retrieved documents was 27. The most productive institutions were Food and Drug Administration, USA (4.2% of total publications) followed by Universita degli Studi di Catania, Italy (3.9%), University of California, San Francisco, USA (3.7%).ConclusionsThis bibliometric study is a testament to the progress in EC research from the world over the last few years. More effort is needed to bridge the gap in EC-based research and to promote better evaluation of EC, risks, health effects, or control services worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Worldwide research productivity in the field of electronic cigarette: a bibliometric analysis

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, our study is not without limitations, most of which are the same as those of studies performed in other biomedical fields [7,8,14,76]. First of all, we used ISI web of knowledge database and therefore articles published in elsewhere were not included.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing urology and nephrology research activity in Arab countries using ISI web of science bibliometric database

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBibliometric analysis is increasingly being used for research assessment. The main objective of this study was to assess research output in Urology and Nephrology subject from the Arab countries. Original scientific articles or reviews published from the 21 Arab countries in “Urology and Nephrology” subject were screened using the ISI Web of Science database. Research productivity was evaluated based on a methodology developed and used in other bibliometric studies by analyzing the annual productivity, names of journals, citations; top 10 active institution and authors as well as country contribution to Urology and Nephrology research.ResultsThree thousand and seventy six documents in “urology and nephrology” subject category were retrieved from 104 journals. This represents 1.4% of the global research output in “urology and nephrology”. Four hundred and two documents (12.66%) were published in Annales D Urologie Journal. The h-index of the retrieved documents was 57. The total number of citations, at the time of data analysis, was 30401 with an average citation of 9.57 per document. Egypt, with a total publication of 1284 (40.43%) ranked first among the Arab countries in “urology and nephrology” subject category. Mansoura University in Egypt was the most productive institution with a total of 561 (15.33%) documents. Arab researchers collaborated most with researchers from the United States of America (226; 7.12%) in urology and nephrology research.ConclusionThe present data reveals a good contribution of some Arab countries to the field of “urology and nephrology”. More efforts are needed by some other Arab countries to bridge the gap in urology and nephrology research. Overall, the quality of urology/nephrology research is considered relatively high as measured by h-index. Cooperation in urology/nephrology research should be encouraged in the Arab world to bridge the gap with that from developed countries.

show abstract

“…New bibliometric methods have been developed and used as effective tools to assess the research patterns of different science fields, mainly regarding the temporal development of scientific outputs, the spatial distribution of authors, and the country/institution collaboration network (Fahimnia et al 2015;Lampe and Hilgers 2015;Neri et al 2015). Bibliometric analysis has been widely used in various fields, including the natural sciences, engineering, the social sciences, and the humanities (De Bakker et al 2005;Nederhof 2006;Campbell et al 2015;Zyoud et al 2015). However, few comprehensive bibliometric studies have been performed on the global landslide research literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%