Bibliometric Analysis of Worldwide Publications on Antimalarial Drug Resistance (2006–2015)

Abstract

Background In response to international efforts to control and eradicate malaria, we designed this study to give a bibliometric overview of research productivity in antimalarial drug resistance (AMDR). Methods Keywords related to AMDR were used to retrieve relevant literature using Scopus database. Results A total of 976 publications with an h-index of 63 were retrieved. The number of publications showed a noticeable increase starting in the early 1990s. The USA was the most productive country with 337 publications equivalent to one-third of worldwide publications in this field. More than two-thirds of publications by the USA (236, 70.03%) were made by international collaboration. Of the top ten productive countries, two countries were from Mekong subregion, particularly Thailand and Cambodia. The Malaria Journal was the most productive journal (136, 13.93%) in this field. Mahidol University (80, 8.20%) in Thailand was the most productive institution. Seven articles in the top-ten list were about artemisinin resistance in Plasmodium falciparum, one was about chloroquine resistance, one was about sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance, and the remaining one was about general multidrug resistance. Conclusion Eradication and control of AMDR require continuing research activity to help international health organizations identify spots that require an immediate action to implement appropriate measures.

Arab world’s growing contribution to global leishmaniasis research (1998–2017): a bibliometric study

“…Similar to other studies [19,33,[35][36][37], some limitations of this bibliometric study should be addressed. Although Scopus is one of the most largest global database [84], it might contain most publications in the field of leishmaniasis research.…”

“…All documents referring to leishmaniasis research during the last two decades were assessed with the following aspects: document types, languages, yearly publications, countries and collaboration patterns, institutions, journals, h-index, citations, and research hotspots. The analysis focused on providing outputs for the top ten prolific of the following: countries, journals with their impact factors (IF), cited articles, and institutions as in the most previous bibliometric studies [19,33,[35][36][37]. In the current study, IF for the most prolific journals were extracted according to the 2017 journal citation report (JCR) at the time of study.…”

“…To encourage and strengthen research capacity in the field of neglected tropical diseases, including leishmaniasis, the WHO highlights the periodic review and development of present and national research agendas [18]. A number of global bibliometric studies exist in various infectious diseases [19][20][21][22], including tropical medicine [23][24][25][26]. In addition, several studies have evaluated the research output for leishmaniasis [25,[27][28][29][30].…”

Bibliometric analysis of literature in pharmacy education: 2000–2016

“…Our study has few limitations that are mostly inherent in search strategy, keyword selection and database used to retrieve the literature. Such limitations have been discussed in previously published bibliometric studies . Additional limitations include the inclusion of editorials, notes and letters in the main analysis.…”

“…Such limitations have been discussed in previously published bibliometric studies. [26][27][28][29] Additional limitations include the inclusion of editorials, notes and letters in the main analysis. Furthermore, the geographical distribution of publications was based on country affiliation of authors listed in the article, which is a debatable method.…”