Differences in Global Scientific Production Between New mRNA and Conventional Vaccines Against COVID-19.

The search for effective vaccines to stop the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented amount of global scientific production and activity. This study aimed to analyze global scientific production on the different vaccine types (mRNA and conventional) that were validated for COVID-19 during the years 2020-2021. The scientific production generated on COVID-19 vaccines during the period 2020-2021 totaled the enormous amount of 20,459 studies published. New mRNA vaccines clearly showed higher production levels than conventional vaccines (viral and inactivated vectors), with 786 and 350 studies, respectively. The USA is the undisputed leader in the global production on COVID-19 vaccines, with Israel and Italy also playing an important role. Among the journals publishing works in this field, the New England Journal of Medicine, the British Medical Journal, and Vaccines stand out from the rest as the most important. The keyword 'immunogenicity' and its derivatives have been more researched for the new mRNA vaccines, while thrombosis has been more studied for conventional vaccines. The massive scientific production generated on COVID-19 vaccines in only two years has shown the enormous gravity of the pandemic and the extreme urgency to find a solution. This high scientific production and the main keywords found for the mRNA vaccines indicate the great potential that these vaccines have against COVID-19 and future infectious diseases. Moreover, this study provides valuable information for guiding future research lines and promoting international collaboration for an effective solution.

Bibliometric Analysis of International Scientific Production on Pharmacologic Treatments for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 During 2020.

Background: COVID-19 is causing a grave global health and economic crisis and the fight against the pandemic has led to unprecedented scientific activity. Bibliometrics could be a useful tool for guiding future researches lines and promoting international collaboration for an effective treatment. For this purpose, we have conducted a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications on drugs and therapies used to treat COVID-19 during 2020. Methods: Data source: Web of Science. We gathered data on scientific production relating to drugs used to treat COVID-19. We calculated impact factors and analyzed production by institution, country, and journal, visualizing our results in bibliometric networks. Results: In 1 year, production relating to COVID-19 exceeded 100 000 publications, with over 6,500 on Drugs and COVID-19. Research into hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, remdesivir, lopinavir and ritonavir, tocilizumab and convalescent plasma is particularly noteworthy. Mean citations/study range from 11.9 to 15.4. Producer institutions fall into three groups: one in the US and centered on Harvard Medical School; another in Europe led by INSERS; and another in China led by Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Production by journal is widespread but the Journal of Medical Virology, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, and American Journal of Transplantation are noteworthy. Conclusions: The volume of research that is currently under way is comparable to the magnitude of the pandemic itself. Such a high volume of studies is infrequent and the impact they have achieved has no known precedent. The producing countries are those with highest incidence of the pandemic and greatest scientific potential; moreover, inter-agency and international collaboration has reached extraordinarily high levels.

Influential variables in the Journal Impact Factor of Dentistry journals.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this contribution is to determine what variables influence the position, by quartiles of the impact factor, as a quality indicator of a journal in the field of Dentistry. METHODS: To this end, 24 journals included in Journal Citation Reports, 6 pertaining to each quartile were selected by a stratified sampling and then an ordinal regression model was estimated stepwise considering the journal impact factor quartile as response variable. RESULTS: The estimation procedure concluded that the average number of papers published yearly by a journal and the percentage of systematic reviews are the most significant variables to be considered, along with the factor representing the journal's degree of adherence to recommendations by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. CONCLUSIONS/CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Systematic reviews have significant effect on the Journal Impact Factor position of a journal as well as adherence to ICMJE recommendations, while papers publishing clinical trials bear no influence on this factor. Greater yearly average of published papers in a journal means a higher impact factor.

Los emerging sources citation index y la internacionalización de las revistas científicas españolas, con especial mención a las de psicología / The Emerging Sources Citation Index and the internationalization of Spanish scientific journals, with special reference to Psychology journals

ANTECEDENTES: España está entre los países que más revistas ha ingresado en Emerging Sources Citation Index, el nuevo producto de Web of Science. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar sus implicaciones y cuantificar sus efectos en los Factores de Impacto. MÉTODO: la presencia española se cuantificó utilizando los listados de Master Journal List, volcados a una hoja de cálculo para su tratamiento. Las implicaciones se observaron mediante análisis de los criterios de los "Journal Selection Process". La repercusión en los impactos se analizó mediante estudio de caso de revistas españolas de Psicología incluidas en Journal Citation Reports (JCR). RESULTADOS: hasta el año 2015 España significa el 1,13% de la Colección Central. Con las 568 revistas de Emerging ha incrementado su presencia hasta el 3,37%. Las áreas más beneficiadas son las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades. Como efecto general, la citación en revistas de Psicología se ha incrementado un 13,18%. CONCLUSIONES: la situación propiciada por Emerging mejorará de forma significativa a corto plazo el número y posición de revistas españolas con Factor de Impacto. De momento, las citas que emiten ya tienen una influencia significativa en el incremento de los impactos de las revistas españolas ya establecidas en los JCR

BACKGROUND: Spain is among the countries that have added more scientific journals into the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), a new product from the Central Collection of Web of Science. The aim of this paper is to analyze the implications of this and quantify the effects on Impact Factors. METHOD: The Spanish presence was quantified using the Master Journal List, converted to a spreadsheet for data processing. The implications were determined by analyzing the criteria "Journal Selection Process". The effect on impact factors was analyzed through a case study of Spanish JCR journals of Psychology. RESULTS: Until 2015, Spain represented 1.13% of the Central Collection. With the 568 journals included in the ESCI, that presence has increased to 3.37%. The areas benefitting most were Social Sciences and Humanities. As a general effect, citation in Psychology journals has increased by an average of 13.18%. CONCLUSIONS: The situation fostered by the ESCI will significantly improve the number and position of Spanish journals with impact factors in the short and medium term. Currently, their citations have already significantly influenced an increase of the impact of Spanish journals included in the Journal Citation Reports

[The Emerging Sources Citation Index and the internationalization of Spanish scientific journals, with special reference to Psychology journals].

The Emerging Sources Citation Index and the internationalization of Spanish scientific journals, with special reference to Psychology journals. BACKGROUND: Spain is among the countries that have added more scientific journals into the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), a new product from the Central Collection of Web of Science. The aim of this paper is to analyze the implications of this and quantify the effects on Impact Factors. METHOD: The Spanish presence was quantified using the Master Journal List, converted to a spreadsheet for data processing. The implications were determined by analyzing the criteria "Journal Selection Process". The effect on impact factors was analyzed through a case study of Spanish JCR journals of Psychology. RESULTS: Until 2015, Spain represented 1.13% of the Central Collection. With the 568 journals included in the ESCI, that presence has increased to 3.37%. The areas benefitting most were Social Sciences and Humanities. As a general effect, citation in Psychology journals has increased by an average of 13.18%. CONCLUSIONS: The situation fostered by the ESCI will significantly improve the number and position of Spanish journals with impact factors in the short and medium term. Currently, their citations have already significantly influenced an increase of the impact of Spanish journals included in the Journal Citation Reports.

Is the trend to publish reviews and clinical trials related to the journal impact factor? Analysis in dentistry field.

It is generally accepted that the Journal Impact Factor is a quality criterion. The objective was to determine the evolution along the period 2010-2016 of number of different types of papers, reviews and clinical trials, published by dental journals, as well as if they are related with the quartile occupied in the Journal Impact Factor 2017 ranking. To this end, ten journals per quartile belonging to the field Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine in the 2017 Journal Citation Reports were randomly selected. For each journal and year, the total number of narrative reviews, systematic reviews (with and without meta-analysis), meta-analysis, clinical trials and randomized controlled trials were obtained from Pubmed. To achieve our goal, the slope of these variables over time was estimated using the least squares method, after which one-way analysis of variance of mean values was performed. In Dentistry, the journals of the top quartiles show a trend to publish increasing amounts of systematic reviews and meta-analysis, than the ones of the third and fourth quartile. On the other hand, globally, there was virtually no increase in narrative reviews, clinical trials and randomized controlled trial. Possible causes of this behavior are also discussed in this article.

Dental research in Spain. A bibliometric analysis on subjects, authors and institutions (1993-2012)

BACKGROUND: Bibliometrics is defined as the use of statistical methods in the analysis of a body of literature to reveal the historical development of subject fields and patterns of authorship, publication, and use. Our objective was to characterize Spanish scientific output in Dentistry through the analysis of Web of Science database in a 20- year period. By means of a bibliometric study documents were statistically analyzed using indicators that showed quantitative and qualitative aspects of the production. Specifically, time course of the scientific production within the time span was analysed, as were the journals where the article was published and the categories of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) in which they belong, thematic areas, authorship, and finally authors and institutions with the highest production in Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: By means of the design of a specific search strategy previously described in the scientific literature, we recovered all citable documents about Dentistry signed by Spanish researchers and included in the WoS database between 1993 and 2012. RESULTS: A total of 3006 documents fulfilled the search criteria, of which 2449 (81.5%) were published in journals within the category Dentistry Oral Surgery and Medicine and 557 (18.5%) within other categories of the JCR. During the four quinquenniums studied, the production increased quantitatively (8.6-fold) and qualitatively. Finally, the universities of Granada and Complutense of Madrid were the institutions with the highest production and most prolific authors. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish dental production sharply increased in the last two decades, reaching quantitative and qualitative levels similar to those of the other medical specialties in the country

Reviewers' ratings and bibliometric indicators: hand in hand when assessing over research proposals?

BACKGROUND: The peer review system has been traditionally challenged due to its many limitations especially for allocating funding. Bibliometric indicators may well present themselves as a complement. OBJECTIVE: We analyze the relationship between peers' ratings and bibliometric indicators for Spanish researchers in the 2007 National R&D Plan for 23 research fields. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyze peers' ratings for 2333 applications. We also gathered principal investigators' research output and impact and studied the differences between accepted and rejected applications. We used the Web of Science database and focused on the 2002-2006 period. First, we analyzed the distribution of granted and rejected proposals considering a given set of bibliometric indicators to test if there are significant differences. Then, we applied a multiple logistic regression analysis to determine if bibliometric indicators can explain by themselves the concession of grant proposals. RESULTS: 63.4% of the applications were funded. Bibliometric indicators for accepted proposals showed a better previous performance than for those rejected; however the correlation between peer review and bibliometric indicators is very heterogeneous among most areas. The logistic regression analysis showed that the main bibliometric indicators that explain the granting of research proposals in most cases are the output (number of published articles) and the number of papers published in journals that belong to the first quartile ranking of the Journal Citations Report. DISCUSSION: Bibliometric indicators predict the concession of grant proposals at least as well as peer ratings. Social Sciences and Education are the only areas where no relation was found, although this may be due to the limitations of the Web of Science's coverage. These findings encourage the use of bibliometric indicators as a complement to peer review in most of the analyzed areas.

[Principles and criteria used by the National Evaluation Committee of Research Activity (CNEAI-Spain) for the assessment of scientific publications: 1989-2009]. / Principos y criterios utilizados en España por la Comisión Nacional Evaluadora de la Actividad Investigadora (CNEAI) para la valoración de las publicaciones científicas: 1989-2009.

Study of the origins, philosophy and history of the criteria used to assess research activities in Spain by the CNEAI. The assessment criteria and quality evidence of publications is discussed. Results are presented on the temporal development of the criteria used, grouped by publication type (articles and books) and fields of knowledge. Between 1989-1996, assessment was based on the definition and goals set by the Spanish scientific framework and on general criteria. Between 1996-2004, the formulation of indicators began to be almost exclusively based on Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Success rates up to 2004 indicate that the evaluation criteria and publishing behaviour matched the "hard sciences", but not the Social Sciences and Economics. In 2005, the criteria used were further developed and reoriented with an eye to softening the preceding JCR-centrism by taking into consideration other databases and defining the quality criteria to be met by journals, books and conferences not included in JCR. Correspondingly, the success rates for 2007 indicate a dramatic recovery in Economics. In the last 4 years, Humanities and Social Sciences have consolidated the further opening of the criteria used with the addition of new benchmarks and the full integration of books.

Investigación de excelencia en España: ¿protagonistas o papeles secundarios? / Research excellence in Spain: main or secondary roles for researchers?

No disponible

No disponible

Principios y criterios utilizados en España por la Comisión Nacional Evaluadora de la Actividad Investigadora (CNEAI) para la valoración de las publicaciones científi cas: 1989-2009 / Principles and criteria used by the National Evaluation Committee of Research Activity (CNEAI-Spain) for the assessment of scientific publications: 1989-2009

Estudio sobre los orígenes, filosofía y trayectoria de los criterios de evaluación de la actividad investigadora utilizados en España por la CNEAI. Se analizan los criterios de valoración e indicios de calidad de las publicaciones. Se presentan los criterios en su desarrollo temporal, estructurados por tipo de publicaciones (artículos y libros) y campos de conocimiento. Se concluye que hasta 1996 la evaluación se sustenta en la definición y objetivos del sistema y en criterios generales. Entre 1996-2004 se inicia la formulación de los indicadores de calidad de la investigación, quedando asociados casi exclusivamente con las publicaciones de impacto (revistas JCR). Las tasas de éxito hasta 2004 indican que criterios de evaluación y comportamientos de publicación correlacionan en las «ciencias duras», pero no en Sociales ni en Economía. En 2005 se desarrollan y reorientan los criterios para suavizar el JCR-centrismo precedente, considerando otras bases de datos y definiendo los criterios de calidad homologables que deben cumplir revistas, libros y congresos. Las tasas de éxito de 2007 indican una recuperación espectacular en Economía. En los 4 últimos años se ha consolidado la apertura de los criterios con la incorporación de nuevos índices de referencia y la plena integración de los libros (AU)

Study of the origins, philosophy and history of the criteria used to assess research activities in Spain by the CNEAI. The assessment criteria and quality evidence of publications is discussed. Results are presented on the temporal development of the criteria used, grouped by publication type (articles and books) and fields of knowledge. Between 1989- 1996, assessment was based on the definition and goals set by the Spanish scientific framework and on general criteria. Between 1996-2004, the formulation of indicators began to be almost exclusively based on Journal Citation Reorts (JCR). Success rates up to 2004 indicate that the evaluation criteria and publishing behaviour matched the «hard sciences», but not the Social Sciences and Economics. In 2005, the criteria used were further developed and reoriented with an eye to softening the preceding JCR-centrism by taking into consideration other databases and defining the quality criteria to be met by journals, books and conferences not included in JCR. Correspondingly, the success rates for 2007 indicate a dramatic recovery in Economics. In the last 4 years, Humanities and Social Sciences have consolidated the further opening of the criteria used with the addition of new benchmarks and the full integration of books (AU)

Visibility of Latin American nursing research (1959-2005).

OBJECTIVES: To analyze scientific activity in Latin American nursing using bibliometric indicators. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a quantitative, descriptive study of the universe of Latin American nursing journals (119) and scientific documents (13,208) published according to current library databases including: the Web of Science (WOS), Medline, LILACS, Periodica, Cuiden, and SciELO. A database was prepared using ProCite. RESULTS: The PAHO (Pan American Health Organization) Open-access Directory of Latin American Nursing Journals includes the greatest number of the 119 journal titles (60%). The average journal longevity is 11.3 years and Brazil produces the greatest percentage (31.9%) of journals. Of the current journals, 55% do not have international readership. The non-Latin American countries that contribute most to document diffusion are Spain, the United States, and England. The doubling time of scientific production of documents is 7.3 years and the annual growth rate is 10%; 2% of researchers form the most productive group of authors. Only in recent years has the number of contributions to the ISI nursing category begun to stabilize. CONCLUSIONS: Latin American scientific nursing production is still growing exponentially and Latin American nursing contributions to knowledge being disseminated through databases of recognized scientific quality seem to be increasing. The current scientific task is to organize and improve the publication processes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We describe the conditions in which Latin American nursing research has become institutionalized, the challenges that it has faced, and the gradual incorporation of such research into international science.

[Medline criteria for scientific journals selection. Methodology and indicators. Application to Spanish medical journals paying special attention to public health]. / Criterios Medline para la selección de revistas científicas. Metodología e indicadores. Aplicación a las revistas médicas españolas con especial atención a las de salud pública.

Due to the strict selection process applied to its indexed journals, Medline is the most prestigious database in the Health and medicine field. The aim of this paper is both to analyze its selection criteria and translate into indicators that can be applied to Spanish medical journals willing to enter the Index Medicus. Analysis samples and methodology to apply obtained from the five groups of criteria considered by Medline (namely, Scope and coverage, Quality of contents, Quality of editorial work, Production quality and Audience) are proposed. A list of qualitative and quantitative indicators related to the five groups of criteria used by Medline is presented; namely, journal scientific output in the national and international context of the discipline, citation, analysis of the editorial committees, the editorial process and the peer-review system, indicators on compliance with the Vancouver guidelines, journal layout and informational quality, attractiveness, audience, journal visibility and interest as regards Medline goals.

Criterios Medline para la selección de revistas científicas. Metodología e indicadores. Aplicación a las revistas médicas españolas con especial atención a las de salud pública / Medline criteria for scientific journals selection. Methodology and indicators. Application to Spanish medical journals paying special attention to public health

Debido en buena parte a los rigurosos procesos de selección queaplica a las revistas que indiza, Medline es la base de datos en Biomedicinay Ciencias de la Salud más prestigiosa del mundo. El objetivode este trabajo es analizar sus criterios de selección y traducirlosen indicadores para su aplicación a las revistas médicas españolascandidatas a ingresar en el Index-Medicus. Se proponen lasmuestras de análisis y la metodología a aplicar derivada de los cincogrupos de criterios contemplados por Medline: Ámbito y Cobertura;Calidad del Contenido; Calidad del Trabajo Editorial; Calidad deProducción y Audiencia. Propuesta de indicadores cualitativos ycuantitativos. Ámbito y Cobertura: indicadores que muestran lapujanza productiva de la revista en el ámbito nacional e internacionalde la especialidad. Calidad del Contenido: análisis de la revista yde sus protagonistas a partir de las citas internacionales que han recibidosus trabajos y de los Factores de Impacto (FI). Calidad TrabajoEditorial: indicadores relativos a los responsables de la política editorialy científica de la revista, a los procesos editoriales y al sistemade revisión de originales que aplica. Indicadores relacionados con elcumplimiento de las directrices Vancouver. Calidad de Producción:indicadores sobre calidad gráfica e informativa de la revista (estándaresinternacionales). Audiencia: indicadores sobre atracción,audiencia, visibilidad e interés de la revista para los objetivos quepersigue Medline

Due to the strict selection process applied to its indexed journals,Medline is the most prestigious database in the Health andmedicine field. The aim of this paper is both to analyze its selectioncriteria and translate into indicators that can be applied to Spanishmedical journals willing to enter the Index Medicus. Analysis samplesand methodology to apply obtained from the five groups of criteriaconsidered by Medline (namely, Scope and coverage, Qualityof contents, Quality of editorial work, Production quality andAudience) are proposed. A list of qualitative and quantitative indicatorsrelated to the five groups of criteria used by Medline is presented;namely, journal scientific output in the national and internationalcontext of the discipline, citation, analysis of the editorialcommittees, the editorial process and the peer-review system, indicatorson compliance with the Vancouver guidelines, journal layoutand informational quality, attractiveness, audience, journal visibilityand interest as regards Medline goals

La Revista Española de Salud Pública ingresa en el Social Science Citation Index de Thomson Scientific / The Revista Española de Salud Pública in the Social Science Citation Index de Thomson Scientific

No disponible

La selección de la literatura científica en el ámbito biomédico: el factor de impacto / The selection of scientific literature in the biomedical field: the impact factor

Revisión de las principales bases de datos nacionales e internacionales dedicadas completa o parcialmente a la Medicina. Se analizan los criterios que emplean para la selección de sus fondos, especialmente revistas, y cuál es la participación de los países latinoamericanos en las mismas. Por otra parte se analizan los criterios empleados por los investigadores para seleccionar la información y las razones que explican la importancia que han adquirido los indicadores cuantitativos del tipo del factor de impacto (AU)

The main national and international databases on health sciences are revised in order to ascertain the criteria used for selecting their material -mainly journals- and the share of Spanish and Latin American journals in them. On the other hand the criteria used by researchers for selecting the information are analyzed as well as the reasons to explain the importance nowadays of quantitative indicators such as the so called “impact factor” (AU)