Visibility, impact, and applications of bibliometric software tools through citation analysis

Abstract

This study examines the visibility, impact, and applications of bibliometric software tools in the peer-reviewed literature through a “Cited Reference Search” using the Web of Science (WOS) database. A total of 2882 citing research articles to eight bibliometric software tools were extracted from the WOS Core Collection between 2010 and 2021. These citing articles are analyzed by publication year, country, publication title, publisher, open access level, funding agency, and WOS category. Mentions of bibliometric software tools in Author Keywords and KeyWords Plus are also compared. The VOSviewer software is utilized to identify specific research areas by discipline from the keyword co-occurrences of the citing articles. The findings reveal that while bibliometric software tools are making a noteworthy impact and contribution to research, their visibility through referencing, Author Keywords, and KeyWords Plus is limited. This study serves as a clarion call to raise awareness and initiate discussions on the citing practices of software tools in scholarly publications.

Evaluating cluster analysis techniques in ChatGPT versus R-language with visualizations of author collaborations and keyword cooccurrences on articles in the Journal of Medicine (Baltimore) 2023: Bibliometric analysis

“…Fifth, FLCA’s uniqueness is not solely relative to SNA in CiteSpace, [ 12 ] VOSviewer, [ 13 ] Bibexcel, [ 9 ] and others. [ 11 ] For a more nuanced comprehension of the FLCA applied to the R platform [ 34 ] (such as those referenced at link [ 71 ] and in Data S2, Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/MD/K857 ), refinements are essential in subsequent studies.…”

“…Visualization techniques incorporating network charts, chord diagrams, circle bar plots, circle packing plots, heat dendrograms, and word clouds were demonstrated, which can be applied to future bibliometrics, but few are seen in traditional professional tools, such as CiteSpace, [ 12 ] VOSviewer, [ 13 ] Bibexcel, [ 9 ] and other specialized bibliometric software. [ 11 ]…”

“…The landscape of SNA is enriched by a myriad of open-source tools that are readily available to users. [10,11] Scholars frequently utilize bibliometric software such as CiteSpace, [12] VOSviewer, [13] and Bibexcel [9] for coword analyses, focusing on both author partnerships and keyword dynamics. [13,14] Nonetheless, the categorization methodologies (e.g., cluster analysis [15,16] ) in these tools often remain nebulous, lacking clarity and consistency.…”

“…In the field of bibliometrics, professionals frequently utilize tools like CiteSpace, [ 12 ] VOSviewer, [ 13 ] Bibexcel, [ 9 ] and other dedicated bibliometric software [ 11 ] to conduct co-word analyses, focusing on keywords [ 21 , 22 ] similarly to author collaborations (AC). However, deriving valuable insights from these analyses can be challenging, particularly when the software’s clustering methods are not clearly defined.…”

A bibliometric analysis of scientific literature in digital dentistry from low- and lower-middle income countries

“…Citations received by scientific work are a key indicator of its impact [ 2 ]. Articles with a high number of citations can emerge as having the most influence on research and scientific work of other authors and provide findings that become the basis of extensive relevant exploration [ 3 ].…”