Are all voices heard in the COVID-19 debate?

Benjamens, Stan; Meijer, Vincent E de; Pol, Robert A.; Haring, Martijn P D

doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03730-z

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, a study of mainstream medical journals found that the geographical origins of COVID-19 authors break down as follows: European (47.7%), North-American (37.3%), China (8.8%) and the rest. While these results align with general research publication patterns, including in times of epidemic outbreak, they also showcase the persisting imbalances in research capacity across countries and regions [15].…”

Section: Patterns Of Collaborationsupporting

confidence: 70%

Meta-research on COVID-19: An overview of the early trends

Colavizza

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID-19 is having a dramatic impact on research and researchers. The pandemic has underlined the severity of known challenges in research and surfaced new ones, but also accelerated the adoption of innovations and manifested new opportunities. This review considers early trends emerging from meta-research on COVID-19. In particular, it focuses on the following topics: i) mapping COVID-19 research; ii) data and machine learning; iii) research practices including open access and open data, reviewing, publishing and funding; iv) communicating research to the public; v) the impact of COVID-19 on researchers, in particular with respect to gender and career trajectories. This overview finds that most early meta-research on COVID-19 has been reactive and focused on short-term questions, while more recently a shift to consider the long-term consequences of COVID-19 is taking place. Based on these findings, the author speculates that some aspects of doing research during COVID-19 are more likely to persist than others. These include: the shift to virtual for academic events such as conferences; the use of openly accessible pre-prints; the 'datafication' of scholarly literature and consequent broader adoption of machine learning in science communication; the public visibility of research and researchers on social and online media.

show abstract

Section: Patterns Of Collaborationsupporting

confidence: 70%

Meta-research on COVID-19: An overview of the early trends

Colavizza

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, this emphasis by scientists on all things COVID-19-related has been observed in a number of secondary studies that examine the rate of science outputs. Bibliometrics and the overall study of examining the evolution of science is important in that it helps understand the rate, priorities of science and helps document this systemic approach to help curb COVID-19 (Benjamens et al, 2020 ). These analyses bring testament to this scientific pivot.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 enabled co-authoring networks: a country-case analysis

Sachini

Sioumalas-Christodoulou

Chrysomallidis

et al. 2021

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we seek to examine the co-authoring pattern of a select group of researchers that are affiliated with a specific country. By way of making use of standard bibliometric analysis, we explore the publication evolution of all COVID-19-related peer reviewed papers that have been (co)-authored by researchers that are affiliated with Greek institutions. The aim is to identify its advancement over time, the institutions involved and the countries with which the co-authors are affiliated with. The timeframe of the study spans from the moment that WHO Director-General declared the novel coronavirus outbreak a public health emergency of international concern (WHO, 2020. Archived: WHO timeline-covid-19. Retrieved from Archived: Who Timeline-COVID-19. https://www.who.int/news/item/27-04-2020-who-timeline---covid-19 . Accessed on 10 May 2020., Archived: WHO timeline-covid-19), January 2020, to October 2020. Findings indicate that there is a steady increase in the number of publications as well as the number of scientific collaborations over time. At a cross-country level, results suggest that the affiliated institutional sectors such as the Higher Education Sector (HES) and the Government Sector (GOV) contributed the most in terms of scientific output. On an international scale, the evolution of the scientific collaboration is imprinted and distributed as a chain of affiliations that linked nations together. Such chains are represented as clusters of countries, in which the scientific connections between different countries can be visualised. It can be reasoned that a significant amount of publications (20%) is affiliated with countries having “traditionally” major scientific impact on the field of Medicine. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11192-021-03952-9.

show abstract

“…In addition, articles published in preprint archives such as medRxiv have received broad and disproportionate media attention prior to their peer review (Bagdasarian et al 2020). Also, the loudest voices in the COVID-19 debate, both original as well as opining articles, have been from mainly European and North-American researchers (Benjamens et al 2020). Rapid dissemination of sometimes premature research findings, and the lack of inclusion of global voices may both contribute to public distrust in scientific integrity and findings.…”

Section: Dear Editormentioning

confidence: 99%