year 14, Issue 1 (January & February 2020)                   Iran J Med Microbiol 2020, 14(1): 1-16 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Danesh F, Ghavidel S. Coronavirus: Scientometrics of 50 Years of Global Scientific Productions. Iran J Med Microbiol. 2020; 14 (1) :1-16
URL: http://ijmm.ir/article-1-1071-en.html
1- Information Management Research Department, Regional Information Center for Science and Technology (RICeST), Shiraz, Iran , farshiddanesh@ricest.ac.ir
2- Department of knowledge and Information Science, School of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
Full-Text [PDF 980 kb]   (2455 Downloads)     |   Abstract (HTML)  (5850 Views)
Full-Text:   (8753 Views)
Introduction

Coronavirus is a common disease between humans and animals (zoonosis) (1, 2), which is enveloped, non-segmented, and has positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus (3). Genotypically and serologically, there are four groups, with approximately thirty types of coronaviruses common to humans, mammals, and birds. So far, considerable attention has paid to international cases of Pathogenesis and pathology (5-7). COVID-19 identified by WHO in Wuhan, China, at the beginning of 2020 (6, 5, 2), is considered the most dangerous virus of this family these days and has raised severe health concerns for all countries of the world (13). The virus causes severe respiratory and intestinal infections in animals and humans (14) and subsequently leads to death (15).
With the increase of scientific publications, the importance of observing such studies has become more critical in assessing the effects of scientific output on the medical sciences and has become an integral part of monitoring the performance of organizations (20). Investigating the existing capacities helps policymakers and research managers in the ranking of performance quality assessment, correct and normative budget allocation (21).
Scientometrics studies in international citation databases such as WOS are one of the essential tools for observing medical research processes and developments (22). Now (March 2020), in line with the challenging and global spread of Coronavirus, medical scientists do many types of research and publish papers to find innovative solutions to prevent the virus. To this end, medical scientists, using various indexes and software to analyze Coronavirus, observe and evaluate research outputs and present their findings to science and technology researchers and policymakers.
Some of the most essential literatures related to scientific representation of medical sciences utilizing scientometrics methods and indicators in Iran and internationally include Coronaviruses bibliographic analysis (14), Nipah Virus (23), MERS-CoV (24), HPV (25), Parasitology (26), Diabetes (27), Surgery (28), Neonatal Healths (29).
A review of the literature indicates that different scientometrics tools have attracted the attention of medical scholars and have been useful in representing the structure of medical science knowledge by analyzing this method. Given the immense and strategic importance of Coronavirus and the increasing scientific publicity of this subject, the study of scientometrics of Coronavirus is of great importance.
The main issue of this paper is to determine the status of the knowledge structure of international Coronavirus research outputs. Representing the scientific structure from different angles will guide Coronavirus specialists and researchers and policymakers in the Ministry of Health and medical science associations. Based on the elaborated theoretical framework, the primary purpose of this paper was to analyze half a century of scientific publications of Coronavirus in the world using scientific methods and tools. It is essential to review the process of scientific publishing, the type of resources, citations to articles, and identify the top journals, researchers, countries, and organizations in this subject area to achieve this goal from 1970 to 2019.


 

Materials and Methods

This applied research was carried out using scientometrics methods and an analytical approach. The statistical population of this article includes 5128 Coronavirus subject area documents indexed on the WOS from 1970 to 2019. The keywords were extracted from the Mesh browser and analyzed using Excel 2016 software.


 

Results

Coronavirus international publication trend
Data analysis showed that the highest percentage of the scientific output of Coronavirus was in 2005 (6.8%), 2004 (6.78%), and 2006 (5.92%), respectively (Figure1).
Different Source Types of Coronavirus Scientific Publications Frequency Distribution
This article aimed to review the scientific publications of the Coronavirus, which are in the four types of Articles (4474), Meeting abstracts (313), Proceedings paper (290), and Reviews (235) respectively (Figure 2).

Coronavirus Citation Analysis
The total number of citations received in the last 50 years of the Coronavirus scientific publications is 165451. There are 3271 self-citations at the same time. Coronavirus scientific output in 2019 received the highest number of citations, 11385. The highest self-citation was in 357 in 2014.


Figure 1. Percentile of Coronavirus science production trend (1970-2019)


Figure 2. Different Source Types of Coronavirus Scientific Publications (1970-2019)

 

Table 1. Coronavirus Citation Analysis (1970-2019)

Year Sum of Times Cited Citations without Self- Citations Citation Self-Citation % Self- Citation Per Year (of 3271%) Year Sum of Times Cited Citations without Self- Citations Citation Self- Citation % Self- Citation Per Year (of 3271%)
1970 252 251 1 1 0.000306 1995 2003 1994 1505 9 0.002751
1971 143 143 8 0 0 1996 8 0 1340 8 0.002446
1972 704 701 38 3 0.000917 1997 413 389 1778 24 0.007337
1973 384 383 55 1 0.000306 1998 41 389 1639 9 0.002751
1974 255 0 58 255 0.077958 1999 98 87 1666 11 0.003363
1975 197 0 67 197 0.060226 2000 415 397 1631 18 0.005503
1976 431 429 70 2 0.000611 2001 85 64 2083 21 0.00642
1977 500 497 98 3 0.000917 2002 57 44 1373 13 0.003974
1978 393 391 200 2 0.000611 2003 753 527 2733 226 0.069092
1979 1 0 215 1 0.000306 2004 675 365 5968 310 0.094772
1980 3 0 250 3 0.000917 2005 16050 15758 8876 292 0.089269
1981 4 0 387 4 0.001223 2006 751 634 8811 117 0.035769
1982 1001 994 527 7 0.00214 2007 180 81 8059 99 0.030266
1983 1329 1315 385 14 0.00428 2008 253 184 8986 69 0.021094
1984 1204 1201 404 3 0.000917 2009 444 388 6905 56 0.01712
1985 4 0 504 4 0.001223 2010 661 616 7404 45 0.013757
1986 7 0 518 7 0.00214 2011 898 865 6381 33 0.010089
1987 263 248 672 15 0.004586 2012 566 510 6075 56 0.01712
1988 94 88 819 6 0.001834 2013 9202 8866 7654 336 0.102721
1989 141 136 802 5 0.001529 2014 630 273 10586 357 0.109141
1990 165 146 1107 19 0.005809 2015 157 14 10151 143 0.043718
1991 612 592 1189 20 0.006114 2016 370 256 11068 114 0.034852
1992 173 161 1284 12 0.003669 2017 910 810 9260 100 0.030572
1993 818 808 1842 10 0.003057 2018 1059 989 9243 70 0.0214
1994 958 936 1391 22 0.006726 2019 345 226 11385 119 0.03638
Sum of Self- Citations: 3271
Sum of received Citations:165451


Coronavirus Top Journals
Table 2 contains data from the top 10 Coronavirus journals ranked by impact factor. Of the journals listed in Table 2, the US publishes 12 and the Netherlands 5 Coronavirus journals. The highest impact factor is 9.58. The Journal of Virology has the highest number of citations and self-citations with 37309 and 5734, respectively.

Top Coronavirus Researchers
Table 3 lists the top ten Coronavirus researchers based on the number of scientific publications in the last 50 years. “Enjuanes, L.” with 114 publications, has the first place. However, the highest h-index belongs to “Yuen, KY” which is 49. It should be noted that “Yuen, KY” has 862 has the self-citation; which is the highest. Of the 5,128 Coronavirus documents in the last 50 years, 888 (over 17%) were published by the top 10 researchers.

The Most Proliferated Countries in Coronavirus
Of the 98 countries that have published the most Coronavirus scientific papers, the United States, China, and the Netherlands are the most proliferated countries (Figure 3).

The Most Proliferated Organizations in Coronavirus
Among the most proliferated organizations in Coronavirus scientific publications, The University of Hong Kong, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Utrecht University have ranked first to third, respectively.

Table 2. Ranking of Coronavirus Journals based on Impact Factor (1970-2019)

Resource Title

Citations

Pure Citations

Self- Citation

Country

Article Influence Score

Eigen Factor

Impact factor (IF)

Quartile (Q)

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 6403 6324 79 USA 4.493 1.02189 9.58 Q1
Emerging infectious diseases 4182 4094 88 USA 2.725 0.05940 7.185 Q1
Journal of Infectious Disease 2939 2889 50 USA 2.164 0.07596 5.045 Q1
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2384 2329 55 USA 1.381 0.05332 4.959 Q1
Journal of Virology 37309 31575 5734 USA 1.381 0.09997 4.324 Q1
Antiviral Research 882 865 17 Netherlands 1.137
 
0.01597 4.13 Q1
The Journal of Biological Chemistry 2971 2916 55 USA 1.503 0.25223 4.106 Q2
Viruses Basel 888 863 25 Switzerland 1.221 0.02409 3.811 Q2
Journal of Clinical Virology 997 980 17 Netherlands 0.970 0.01530 3.02 Q2
Journal of General Virology 6498 6185 313 England 0.883 0.01877 2.809 Q2


Table 3. Ranking of Coronavirus Researcher based on Record Number (1970-2019)

Author

Affiliation

Record

% of 5128

h-index

Citation

Self-Citation

Pure Citation

Enjuanes L Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, National Center of Biotechnology (CNB-CSIC), Madrid, Spain 114 2.223 42 4105 603 3502
Perlman S Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA 107 2.087 36 2914 266 2648
Yuen KY Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China 107 2.087 49 10105 862 9243
Weiss SR Department of Microbiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA 97 1.892 36 3424 459 2965
Baric RS Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA 85 1.658 36 3676 283 3393
Rottier PJM Virology Division, Department of Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Utrecht University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht, the Netherlands 84 1.638 41 5146 346 4800
Drosten C Institute of Virology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany. 82 1.599 38 8500 299 8201
Liu DX Guangdong Province Key Laboratory of Microbial Signals & Disease Control, and Integrative Microbiology Research Centre, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China 73 1.424 30 1867 455 1412
Makino S Department of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, USA 72 1.404 33 2904 358 2546
Woo PCY State Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong 67 1.307 34 4831 558 4273



Figure 3. The Most Proliferated Countries in Coronavirus (1970-2019)


Figure 4. The Most Proliferated Organizations in Coronavirus (1970-2019)


 

Discussion

In the past 50 years, the fewest frequency of Coronavirus scientific publications were indexed in the WoS from 1970 to 1975 and the most documents were published in 2005, 2004, and 2006. The scientific publications trend of this paper is in line with the results of Bonilla-Aldana et al. (14). The United States, the Journal of Virology, the University of Hong Kong, and “Enjuanes L.” are the most proliferated ones in the Coronavirus publications, which is in line with the results of Zyoud (24). In terms of increased research activities and scientific publications, the results of this article are similar to those of Shirshahi et al. (26), Morovati and Sotudeh (27), and Emami et al. (25).


 

Conclusion

Considering the new and widespread wave of COVID19 infection in China and especially in Iran, considerable studies and clinical trials are ongoing. The findings of this article can be useful to scientists who are currently researching COVID19, especially Iranian specialists. It recommended that the paper summary will design in brochure format and widely disseminate to the researchers through the Iranian Microbiology Society.

 

Acknowledgements

In this regard, we appreciate the Infectious diseases experts for their valuable comments.


 

Conflicts of Interest

Authors declared no conflict of interests.


 

Type of Study: Original | Subject: Medical Virology
Received: 2020/02/20 | Accepted: 2020/03/10 | ePublished: 2020/03/14

References
1. World Health Organization (WHO). Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Available at: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200211-sitrep-22-ncov.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2020).
2. Gralinski EL ،Menachery VD. Return of the Coronavirus: 2019-nCoV. Viruses, 2020; 12(2): 135. [DOI:10.3390/v12020135] [PMID]
3. Zhu Z, Zhang Z, Chen W, Cai Z, Ge X, Zhu H, Jiang T, Tan W, and Peng Y. Predicting the receptor-binding domain usage of the coronavirus based on kmer frequency on spike protein. Infection, genetics, and evolution: journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases. 2018 Jul; 61:183-4. [DOI:10.1016/j.meegid.2018.03.028] [PMID]
4. Li G, Fan Y, Lai Y, Han T, Li Z, Zhou P, Pan P, Wang W, Hu D, Liu X, Zhang Q. Coronavirus Infections, and Immune Responses. Journal of Medical Virology. 2020 Jan 25. [DOI:10.1002/jmv.25685] [PMID]
5. Zhao S, Musa SS, Lin Q, Ran J, Yang G & et al. Estimating the Unreported Number of Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Cases in China in the First Half of January 2020: A Data-Driven Modelling Analysis of the Early Outbreak. J. Clin. Med, 2020; 9(2): 388. [DOI:10.3390/jcm9020388] [PMID]
6. Wang M, Cao R, Zhang L & et al. Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro. Cell Res, 2020. [DOI:10.1038/s41422-020-0282-0] [PMID] [PMCID]
7. Minjin W, Yanbing Z, Zhiyong Z, Zongan L, Yu C, Hong T, Bin S, Zixing H, Yan K, Ping F, Binwu Y, Weimin L. A precision medicine approach to managing Wuhan Coronavirus pneumonia. Precision Clinical Medicine, 2020, pbaa002,
8. Liu J, Zheng X, Tong Q, Li W, Wang B, Sutter K, Trilling M, Lu M, Dittmer U and Yang D. Overlapping and discrete aspects of the pathology and pathogenesis of the emerging human pathogenic coronaviruses SARS‐CoV, MERS‐CoV, and 2019‐nCoV. J Med Virol, 2020; Accepted Author Manuscript. [DOI:10.1002/jmv.25709] [PMID]
9. Daszak P, Olival KJ, Li H. A strategy to prevent future pandemics similar to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. Biosafety and Health, 2020; in Press, Elsevier. [DOI:10.1016/j.bsheal.2020.01.003]
10. Tavakoli A, Karbalaie Niya M H, Keshavarz M, Safarnezhad Tameshke F, Monavari S H. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Iran J Med Microbiol, 2017; 11 (1):1-8.
11. Momattin H, Al-Ali AY, Al-Tawfiq JA. A Systematic Review of therapeutic agents for the treatment of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease, 2019; 30: 9-18. [DOI:10.1016/j.tmaid.2019.06.012] [PMID]
12. Vahdat K, Amini A, Najafi A, HaerNejad M J. A Review of Novel Coronavirus, cause of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. Iran South Med J Bimonthly, 2014; 16 (6):486-492. (Persian)
13. Cui J, Li F & Shi Z. Origin and evolution of pathogenic coronaviruses. Nature Reviews Microbiology (Nat Rev Microbiol), 2019; 17: 181-192. [DOI:10.1038/s41579-018-0118-9] [PMID]
14. Bonilla-Aldana DK, Quintero-Rada K, Montoya-Posada JP, Ramirez S, Paniz-Mondolfi A, Rabaan A, Sah R, Rodríguez-Morales AJ. SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and now the 2019-novel CoV: Have we investigated enough about coronaviruses?-A bibliometric analysis. Travel medicine and infectious disease. 2020 Jan 30:101566. [DOI:10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101566] [PMID]
15. Nishiura H, Kobayashi T, Yang Y, Hayashi K, Miyama T, Kinoshita R, Linton NM, Jung SM, Yuan B, Suzuki A, Akhmetzhanov AR. The Rate of Underascertainment of Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Infection: Estimation Using Japanese Passengers Data on Evacuation Flights. J. Clin. Med, 2020; 9, 419. [DOI:10.3390/jcm9020419] [PMID]
16. Yazdani K, Rahimi-Movaghar A, Nedjat S, Ghalichi L, Khalili M. A 5-year scientometric analysis of research centers affiliated to Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Med J Islam Repub Iran, 2015; 29 (1): 375-384.
17. Yazdani K, Nejat S, Rahimi-Movaghar A, Ghalichee L, Khalili M. Scientometrics: Review of Concepts, Applications, and Indicators. Iranian Journal of Epidemiology (IJE), 2015; 10 (4): 78-88. (Persian)
18. Molinari A, Molinari JF. Mathematical aspects of a new criterion for ranking scientific institutions based on the h-index. Scientometrics, 2008; 75(2): 339-56. [DOI:10.1007/s11192-007-1872-z]
19. Molinari JF, Molinari A. A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics. 2008; 2008; 75(1):163-74. [DOI:10.1007/s11192-007-1853-2]
20. Rezagholizadeh A, Shayanfar A, Hanaee J, Jouyban A. Scientometric evaluation of pharmaceutical chemistry departments of faculties of pharmacy in Iran. Description of Health 2017; 8(2): 75-87. (Persian)
21. Ivancheva LE. Scientometrics Today: A Methodological Overview. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2008; 2: 47-56. [DOI:10.1080/09737766.2008.10700853]
22. Makkizadeh F & Sa'adat F. Bibliometric and thematic analysis of articles in the field of infertility (2011-2015). International journal of reproductive biomedicine (Yazd, Iran) 2017; 15(11): 719-728. (Persian) [DOI:10.29252/ijrm.15.11.719]
23. Singh N, Brar RS, Chavan SB & Singh J. Scientometric analyses and visualization of a scientific outcome on the Nipah virus. CURRENT SCIENCE (A Fortnightly Journal of Research), 2019; 117(10). [DOI:10.18520/cs/v117/i10/1574-1584]
24. Zyoud SH. Global research trends of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: a bibliometric analysis. BMC Infect Dis, 2016; 16, 255. [DOI:10.1186/s12879-016-1600-5] [PMID] [PMCID]
25. Danesh F, Ghavidel S. Visualizing the Clusters and Dynamics of HPV Research Area. Iran J Med Microbiol, 2019; 13 (4) :266-278. [DOI:10.30699/ijmm.13.4.266]
26. Khasseh A, Fakhar M, Soosaraei M, Sadeghi S. Evaluation of scientific performance of Iranian researchers in parasitology domain in ISI databases. Iran J Med Microbiol, 2011; 4 (4):41-50.
27. Emami Z, Hariri N, Khamseh M E, Nooshinfard F. Mapping diabetes research in Middle Eastern countries during 2007-2013: A scientometric analysis. Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Med J Islam Repub Iran, 2018; 32 (1):486-494. [DOI:10.14196/mjiri.32.84] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. Shirshahi S & et al. mapping the structure of surgery discipline in the Science Citation Index. Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Health Information Management (Health Inf Manage), 2014; 11(7): 830-839.
29. Morovati M, Sotudeh H. Scientific Productivity in Neonates' Health Field in Scopus. Int J Pediatr, 2016; 4(6): 1837-1846.
30. Soheili F, Danesh F, Mesrinejad F & Isfandyari Moghadam A. Lotka's Law of Scientific Productivity and Bradford's Law of Scatter among Researchers at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences based on Web of Science Database. Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Health Information Management (Health Inf Manage (2012; 8(6): 766-773.
31. Birkle C, Pendlebury DA, Schnell J & Adams J. Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 2020; 1(1), 363-376. [DOI:10.1162/qss_a_00018]
32. Clarivate Analytics, available at https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/essays/impact-factor/ (access Feb 12, 2020).
33. Grech V, Rizk DEE. Increasing importance of research metrics: Journal Impact Factor and h-index. Int Urogynecol J, 2018; 29: 619-620. [DOI:10.1007/s00192-018-3604-8] [PMID]
34. Eigenfactor, available at http://www.eigenfactor.org (access March 6, 2020).
35. Bergstrom TC, West JD, Wiseman MA. The Eigenfactor™ Metrics. The Journal of Neuroscience (J Neurosci), 2008; 28(45): 11433-11434. [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0003-08.2008] [PMID] [PMCID]
36. Bergstrom C. Eigenfactor: measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. C&RL News, 2007; 314-316. [DOI:10.5860/crln.68.5.7804]
37. Song Z, Xu Y, Bao L, Zhang L, Yu P, Qu Y, Zhu H, Zhao W, Han Y, Qin C. From SARS to MERS, Thrusting Coronaviruses into the Spotlight. Viruses, 2019; 11(1): 59. [DOI:10.3390/v11010059] [PMID] [PMCID]
38. Leist SR, Jensen KL, Baric RS, Sheahan TP. Increasing the translation of mousemodels of MERS coronavirus pathogenesisthrough kinetic hematological analysis. PLoS ONE, 2019; 14(7): e0220126. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0220126] [PMID] [PMCID]
39. Noroozi chakoli A, Jafari S. Analytical assessment of the relationship between the quality and self-citation in Persian Humanities Journals. Caspian Journal of Scientometrics) CJS(. 2014; 1 (2): 57-65.
40. Hirsch JE. hα: An index to quantify an individual's scientific leadership. Scientometrics, 2019; 118, 673-686. [DOI:10.1007/s11192-018-2994-1]
41. dehghanizadeh M, Haji Zeinolabedini M, hasanzadeh M. Citation analysis of the arti-cles from the faculty members of Tehran University indexed in Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC), 2006-2011. Scientometrics Research Journal (Scientific Bi-Quarterly of Shahed University), 2016; 2(3): 99-111.
42. Shaibu M, Anthony M & Emmanuel N. On the influence of uncited publications on a researcher's h-index. Scientometrics, Springer; Akadémiai Kiadó, 2020; 122(3): 1791-1799. [DOI:10.1007/s11192-020-03356-1]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2021 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Iranian Journal of Medical Microbiology

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb | Publisher: Farname Inc