COVID-19 will stimulate a new coronavirus research breakthrough: a 20-year bibliometric analysis

Tao, Zhengbo; Zhou, Siming; Yao, Yong-ming; Wen, Kaicheng; Da, Wacili; Meng, Yan; Yang, Keda; Liu, Huan; Lin, Tao

doi:10.21037/atm.2020.04.26

Cited by 76 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to past trends, China and the USA lead in COVID-19 scientific output (Hook & Porter, 2020;Hossain, 2020;Chahrour, Assi, Bejjani, et al, 2020). Based on a social network analysis of the current and past coronaviruses research over the past two decades, Tao et al (2020) found that while the USA has the highest level of degree centrality or has the highest impact on other countries (followed by France and the UK), research teams are relatively scattered, as demonstrated by the study's low-density global map. Bibliometric studies further identified a positive relationship between COVID-19 cases and publications; countries that were most affected by COVID-19 also produced the most scientific documents (Dehghanbanadaki, et al, 2020;Zhang, Zhao, Sun, et al, 2020), but this pattern was not always consistent.…”

Section: International Research Collaboration During Global Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific globalism during a global crisis: research collaboration and open access publications on COVID-19

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study sought to understand the nature of scientific globalism during a global crisis, particularly COVID-19. Findings show that scientific globalism occurs differently when comparing COVID-19 publications with non-COVID-19 publications during as well as before the pandemic. Despite the tense geopolitical climate, countries increased their proportion of international collaboration and open-access publications during the pandemic. However, not all countries engaged more globally. Countries that have been more impacted by the crisis and those with relatively lower GDPs tended to participate more in scientific globalism than their counterparts.

show abstract

Section: International Research Collaboration During Global Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific globalism during a global crisis: research collaboration and open access publications on COVID-19

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the choice of phrases and terms related to mental health and each of the outbreaks was exhaustive. Unlike prior analyses of the scientific literature on coronaviruses, ours did not limit to records in English ( Liu et al, 2020 ; Nowakowska et al, 2020 ; Tao et al, 2020 ; Zhai et al, 2020 ) or English and Chinese only ( Yu et al, 2020 ). We additionally extracted records from more than two databases ( Haghani et al, 2020 ; Liu et al, 2020 ) and included editorials, commentaries, letters, case reports, news, and narrative reviews ( Liu et al, 2020 ; Yu et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently published bibliometric analyses either looked at research output on various scientific and medical topics of all coronavirus outbreaks including the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) ( Bonilla-Aldana et al, 2020 ; Haghani et al, 2020 ; Liu et al, 2020 ; Tao et al, 2020 ; Yu et al, 2020 ; Zhai et al, 2020 ) or were limited to the current COVID-19 pandemic overall ( De Felice and Polimeni, 2020 ; Nowakowska et al, 2020 ). Our study is unique in that it examined an underexplored area in the COVID-19 research ( Liu et al, 2020 ), namely, the trend in mental health research, and compared the findings with two prior distinct viral outbreaks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the time lag between the first studies on all three outbreaks in general and the first studies on mental health aspects of the outbreaks in particular, research output in the latter area follows an upward trend similar to that of other research areas. Indeed, previous bibliometric analyses found increased output in microbiological, epidemiological, and clinical research of coronaviruses that peaked one to two years following SARS and MERS outbreaks ( Haghani et al, 2020 ; Nowakowska et al, 2020 ; Tao et al, 2020 ). The gradual increase in mental health research over time is important for all pandemics, particularly COVID-19, given the dire need for generating evidence to guide best practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mental health research in response to the COVID-19, Ebola, and H1N1 outbreaks: A comparative bibliometric analysis

Maalouf

Mdawar

Meho

et al. 2021

Journal of Psychiatric Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Both the COVID-19 pandemic and its management have had a negative impact on mental health worldwide. There is a growing body of research on mental health as it relates to the pandemic. The objective of this study is to use bibliometric analyses to assess the mental health research output related to the COVID-19 pandemic and compare it to that of the West Africa Ebola and H1N1 outbreaks. Methodology We performed comprehensive searches in Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases, and included all types of documents related to the three outbreaks published since the respective beginnings up to August 26, 2020. Results Despite the shorter time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, relative to Ebola and H1N1, we found a much greater number of mental health documents related to COVID-19 (n=3,070) compared to the two other outbreaks (127 for Ebola and 327 for H1N1). The proportion of documents in the top 10% journals was 31% for COVID-19, 24% for Ebola, and 40% for H1N1. Authors affiliated with institutions located in high-income countries published or contributed to 79% of all documents followed by authors from upper-middle-income countries (23%), lower-middle-income countries (10%), and low-income countries (2%). Approximately 19% of the documents reported receiving funding and 23% were the product of international collaboration. Conclusion Mental health research output is already greater for COVID-19 compared to Ebola and H1N1 combined. A minority of documents reported funding, was the product of international collaboration, or was published by authors located in low-income countries during the three outbreaks in general, and the COVID-19 pandemic in particular.

show abstract

“…(2) the study is judged to have some concerns for multiple domains in a way that substantially lowers confidence in the result. 10. Summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection An item would be scored "0" if it was answered "No" or "Unlear"; if it was answered "Yes", then the item scored "1".…”

Section: Bias In Measurement Of Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of depression, anxiety, delirium, and post-traumatic stress disorder among COVID-19 patients: protocol for a living systematic review

Shi

Zhao

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Previous studies on the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of the patients has been limited by the lack of relevant data. With the rapid and sustained growth of the publications on COVID-19 research, we will perform a living systematic review (LSR) to provide comprehensive and continuously updated data to explore the prevalence of depression, anxiety, delirium, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among COVID-19 patients.Methods We will perform a comprehensive search of the following databases: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Chinese Biomedicine Literature to identify relevant studies. We will utilize different tools to examine the bias risks (quality) regarding studies of varying design types, such as the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) for randomized controlled trials (RCT), the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort and case-control studies, etc. The literature searches would be updated every month. We will perform meta-analysis if any new eligible studies or data are obtained and resubmit an updated systematic review if any change in outcomes and heterogeneity is determined after the addition of the new studies. There will be no restrictions on language or year of publication.Discussion This LSR would provide an in-depth and up-to-date summary of the psychological impact of COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment on the patients. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020196610

show abstract

COVID-19 will stimulate a new coronavirus research breakthrough: a 20-year bibliometric analysis

Cited by 76 publications

References 22 publications

Scientific globalism during a global crisis: research collaboration and open access publications on COVID-19

Scientific globalism during a global crisis: research collaboration and open access publications on COVID-19

Mental health research in response to the COVID-19, Ebola, and H1N1 outbreaks: A comparative bibliometric analysis

Prevalence of depression, anxiety, delirium, and post-traumatic stress disorder among COVID-19 patients: protocol for a living systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About