Global Cardiovascular Research Output, Citations, and Collaborations: A Time-Trend, Bibliometric Analysis (1999–2008)

Abstract

IntroductionHealth research is one mechanism to improve population-level health and should generally match the health needs of populations. However, there have been limited data to assess the trends in national-level cardiovascular research output, even as cardiovascular disease [CVD] has become the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide.Materials and MethodsWe performed a time trends analysis of cardiovascular research publications (1999–2008) downloaded from Web of Knowledge using a iteratively-tested cardiovascular bibliometric filter with >90% precision and recall. We evaluated cardiovascular research publications, five-year running actual citation indices [ACIs], and degree of international collaboration measured through the ratio of the fractional count of addresses from one country against all addresses for each publication.Results and DiscussionGlobal cardiovascular publication volume increased from 40 661 publications in 1999 to 55 284 publications in 2008, which represents a 36% increase. The proportion of cardiovascular publications from high-income, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] countries declined from 93% to 84% of the total share over the study period. High-income, OECD countries generally had higher fractional counts, which suggest less international collaboration, than lower income countries from 1999–2008. There was an inverse relationship between cardiovascular publications and age-standardized CVD morbidity and mortality rates, but a direct, curvilinear relationship between cardiovascular publications and Human Development Index from 1999–2008.ConclusionsCardiovascular health research output has increased substantially in the past decade, with a greater share of citations being published from low- and middle-income countries. However, low- and middle-income countries with the higher burdens of cardiovascular disease continue to have lower research output than high-income countries, and thus require targeted research investments to improve cardiovascular health.

Spatial Scientometrics and Scholarly Impact: A Review of Recent Studies, Tools, and Methods

“…All three studies observe significant positive effects of Research and Development (R&D) investments, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and population on publication output. Pasgaard and Strange (2013) and Huffman et al (2013) also find that field-related variables such as burden of disease in the case of cardiovascular research and CO 2 emissions in the case of climate change research explain national publication output.…”

“…For instance, Pasgaard and Strange (2013) and Huffman et al (2013) explain national distributions of publication output in climate change research and cardiovascular research, while Meo, Al Masri, Usmani, Memon, and Zaidi (2013) build a similar model to explain the overall publication count of a set of Asian countries. All three studies observe significant positive effects of Research and Development (R&D) investments, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and population on publication output.…”

Letter by Sipido and Glänzel Regarding Article, “Poorly Cited Articles in Peer-Reviewed Cardiovascular Journals from 1997 to 2007: Analysis of 5-Year Citation Rates”

“…Recent studies providing a more differentiated methodology have not been considered. 6 A major issue is the application of universal thresholds, first for the delineation of what the authors consider poorly cited articles and, later on, for the determination of poorly cited journals. This selection must be biased, because the predefined universal thresholds are arbitrary and do not take into account the different nature of articles and the different scopes and profiles of the journals.…”

Response to Letter Regarding Article, “Poorly Cited Articles in Peer-Reviewed Cardiovascular Journals from 1997 to 2007: Analysis of 5-Year Citation Rates”

“…We agree that a bibliometric filter 4 is an alternative way to identify cardiovascular articles, but it has its own limitations: 1 in 10 articles identified are not relevant to the field of cardiovascular research, this method does not identify cardiovascular journals, and the filter search terms are not publicly available, limiting reproducibility and use.…”