Altmetric and impact analysis of randomized clinical trials in dentistry.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated altmetrics, citations, and field-normalized impact of dental articles reporting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published within a one-year period. METHODS: Data were collected in 2024 from PubMed-indexed RCTs published in 2019. Dependent variables included Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), PlumX citations, and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). Independent variables encompassed article-, author-, and journal-related variables. Adjusted quasi-Poisson regression models were used to assess associations. Point-biserial correlation evaluated the relationship between Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and selected reporting variables. RESULTS: A total of 653 RCTs were included, with periodontology, implantology, and oral and maxillofacial surgery comprising 50.4 % of the sample. Only 28.6 % of the articles reported CONSORT use, 49.6 % pre-registered their protocol, and 68.8 % reported a sample size calculation. Most articles (63.6 %) reported no conflicts of interest, with unclear sponsorship being the most frequent (34.6 %). Regression analyses revealed significant associations for AAS, PlumX citations, and FWCI with various factors. JIF increased AAS by 17 % per unit, PlumX citations by 13 %, and FWCI by 6 %. Protocol pre-registration boosted AAS by 132 %, while mixed or no sponsorship increased PlumX citations by up to 47 %. First author H-index increased PlumX citations and FWCI by 1 % per unit, while first author continent impacted AAS, citations, and FWCI. Weak positive correlations between JIF and both protocol pre-registration and CONSORT use were observed. No significant differences were observed across different dental fields for any metric. CONCLUSION: An interplay among article-, author-, and journal-related variables collectively influenced the online attention, citations, and impact of dental RCT articles. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Understanding the factors that influence the visibility and impact of dental RCTs can guide researchers in improving the design, reporting, and dissemination of their studies, ultimately enhancing the quality and reach of dental research.

Gender bias and menstrual blood in stem cell research: A review of pubmed articles (2008-2020).

Despite proven scientific quality of menstrual blood mesenchymal cells, research and science output using those cells is still incipient, which suggests there is a resistance to the study of this type of cell by scientists, and a lack of attention to its potential for cell therapy, regenerative medicine and bioengineering. This study analyzes the literature about the menstrual blood mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (mbMSC) on the PubMed database between 2008-2020 and the social attention it received on Twitter. A comparative analysis showed that mbMSC accounts for a very small portion of mesenchymal cell research (0.25%). Most first authors are women (53.2%), whereas most last authors are men (63.74%), reinforcing an already known, and still significant, gender gap between last and corresponding authors. Menstrual blood tends to be less used in experiments and its scientific value tends to be underestimated, which brings gender bias to a technical and molecular level. Although women are more positive in the mbMSC debate on Twitter, communication efforts toward visibility and public interest in menstrual cells has room to grow.

Indicadores bibliométricos: impacto y altmetrics para una evaluación amplia y equitativa de las revistas científicas de Colombia / Bibliometrics Indicators: Impact and Altmetrics for an Extensive and Equitable Assessment of Colombian Scientific Journals / Indicadores bibliométricos: impacto e altmetria para uma avaliação ampla e equitativa das revistas científicas colombianas

La medición y análisis de la calidad de las publicaciones científicas es de fundamental importancia para evaluar el progreso e impacto de investigadores, grupos de investigación y revistas científicas en la comunidad académica y la sociedad (1,2). Tradicionalmente, la evaluación se encomendaba a pares de reconocida trayectoria, idoneidad y prestigio. Sin embargo, para eliminar subjetividades, desde hace varios años se ha recurrido a indicadores bibliométricos que propenden por una calificación mensurable, objetiva y multidimensional (1,3). Los indicadores bibliométricos (IB) pueden definirse como cuantificadores de información bibliográfica, disponible en documentos científicos y académicos, susceptible de ser analizada en términos de producción y consumo (1,2). Existe una variada tipología de IB (1,2) en función del objeto a examinar (investigador, revista o grupo de investigación) y que en algunos casos son transversales a este. Así, los indicadores personales (edad, sexo y antecedentes de los autores) solo aplican a investigadores o grupos, mientras que los de productividad e impacto aplican también a revistas. Para estas, el indicador de productividad (cantidad) y, aún más, el de impacto ("calidad") son rutinariamente empleados para clasificarlas y compararlas con el propósito, cada vez más controversial, de medir su pertinencia y relevancia académica y/o social (4).

Measuring and analyzing the quality of scientific publications is fundamentally important for assessing the progress and impact of researchers, research groups and scientific journals in the academic community and society (1,2). Traditionally, this assessment was entrusted to peers with a recognized track record, eligibility and prestige. However, bibliometric indicators have been used for several years to eliminate subjectivity, which aim at a measurable, objective and multi-dimensional qualification (1,3). Bibliometric indicators (BI) can be defined as quantifiers of the bibliographic information available in scientific and academic documents susceptible to being analyzed in terms of production and consumption (1,2). There is a typological variety of BI (1,2) based on the object to be examined (researcher, journal or research group) and, in some cases, they are cross-sectional to it. In this way, personal indicators (age, gender and background of the authors) only apply to researchers or groups, while productivity and impact also apply to journals. For journals, the productivity (quantity) and, more so, impact ("quality") indicators, are routinely used to classify journals and compare them, with the increasingly controversial purpose of measuring their academic and/or social pertinence and relevance (4).

A medição e análise da qualidade das publicações científicas é de fundamental importância para avaliar o progresso e o impacto de pesquisadores, grupos de pesquisa e revistas científicas na comunidade acadêmica e na sociedade (1,2). Tradicionalmente, a avaliação era confiada a pares de reconhecida trajetória, idoneidade e prestígio. No entanto, a fim de eliminar subjetividades, há vários anos são utilizados indicadores bibliométricos que visam uma qualificação mensurável, objetiva e multidimensional (1,3). Indicadores bibliométricos (IB) podem ser definidos como quantificadores de informações bibliográficas, disponíveis em documentos científicos e acadêmicos, passíveis de análise em termos de produção e consumo (1,2). Existe uma tipologia de IB variada (1,2) dependendo do objeto a ser examinado (pesquisador, periódico ou grupo de pesquisa) e que em alguns casos são transversais a ele. Assim, os indicadores pessoais (idade, sexo e formação dos autores) se aplicam apenas a pesquisadores ou grupos, enquanto os de produtividade e impacto também se aplicam a periódicos. Para estes, o indicador de produtividade (quantidade) e, mais ainda, o indicador de impacto ("qualidade") são rotineiramente utilizados para classificá-los e compará-los com o propósito cada vez mais controverso de medir sua pertinência e relevância acadêmica e/ou social (4).

Influência das métricas de mídias sociais nas citações dos periódicos brasileiros de Enfermagem indexados na Scopus / The influence of social media metrics on citations of brazilian nursing journals

O uso de mídias sociais por pesquisadores, instituições, publicações e público em geral, assim como a adoção da altmetria para aferição de impacto de produtos científicos em diferentes plataformas online, vem ao encontro do que preconizam as novas propostas para a comunicação científica. A Enfermagem possui uma produção científica por vezes mais acessível à sociedade o que lhe permite alcançar um público mais amplo e diversificado, por vezes não acadêmico, que acessa, lê e discute temas que muitas vezes fazem parte do seu cotidiano. A tese justifica-se pela carência de estudos brasileiros sobre o uso de modelos, métodos e técnicas estatísticas para medir os efeitos da relação e da possibilidade de usar métricas de mídias sociais para prever o volume de citações de artigos científicos da Enfermagem. Estudo exploratório e de abordagem quantitativa que analisa o efeito das interações em mídias sociais nas citações de 4.776 artigos publicados em onze periódicos brasileiros do campo da Enfermagem indexados na Scopus no período de 2015 a 2019. Os dados de impacto sobre os artigos no Mendeley, Twitter e Facebook, foram fornecidos pela PlumX. Também foram coletados dados altmétricos do corpus nas contas das revistas no Facebook e no Twitter. Para predição de resultados foi utilizado o modelo de regressão Binomial Negativo devido à natureza dos dados disponíveis. Foi observado que 99% do corpus estava coberto no Mendeley, 19,6% no Facebook e 12,6% no Twitter. Foi verificada uma correlação moderada (rs = 0,591, p < 0,05) entre o volume de leitores no Mendeley e o volume de citações na Scopus Os resultados demonstraram uma correlação nula entre as interações recebidas pelos artigos no Facebook (rs = - 0,129, p < 0,05) e no Twitter (rs = 0,141, p < 0,05) com as citações recebidas pelos artigos na Scopus. O modelo de regressão demonstrou que para cada aumento no número leitores em um artigo no Mendeley, mantendo-se outros parâmetros fixos, tem-se um aumento aproximado de 0,7% no número de citações deste artigo na Scopus. Já para cada aumento na variável ano, mantendo os outros parâmetros fixos, tem-se aproximadamente 39,8% de aumento no número de citações recebidas por um artigo na Scopus. Foram postados no Facebook pelos periódicos da Enfermagem 31,3% dos artigos publicados em 2019. O modelo de regressão demonstrou que para cada aumento no número de interações em um artigo no Facebook, mantendose os outros parâmetros fixos, tem-se um aumento médio de 2,2% no número de citações na Scopus. Foram divulgados no Twitter 16,9% dos artigos publicados pelos periódicos em 2019. Ficou evidenciada a natureza díspar do tipo de impacto que é mensurado pelas métricas tradicionais, baseadas em citações, e as métricas alternativas, percebidas em mídias sociais. Reafirma-se o que já foi exposto na literatura: a altmetria pode ser utilizada para complementar, mas não para substituir, o impacto medido pelas métricas tradicionais baseadas em citações formais, permitindo observar de forma mais ampliada como se dão os processos da comunicação científica em ambientes online informais.

The use of social media by researchers, institutions, publications and the general public, as well as the adoption of altmetrics to measure the impact of scientific products on different online platforms, is in line with the new proposals for scientific communication. Nursing has a scientific production that is sometimes more accessible to society, which makes it possible to reach a broader and more varied audience, sometimes non-academic, that accesses, reads and discusses topics that are often part of their daily lives. The dissertation is justified by the lack of Brazilian studies about the use of models, methods and statistical techniques to measure the effects of the relationship and the possibility of using social media metrics to predict the amount of citations of scientific articles in Nursing. This is an exploratory study with a quantitative approach, which analyzes the effect of interactions in social media on the citations of 4,776 articles published in eleven Nursing Brazilian journals indexed in Scopus from 2015 to 2019. PlumX provided the impact of data sharing on articles on Mendeley, Twitter and Facebook. Besides, we collected altmetric data of the corpus on Facebook and Twitter accounts of the journals. To predict the results, we used the Negative Binomial regression model due to the nature of the available data. We found that Mendeley covers 99% of the corpus; Facebook, 19.6% and Twitter, 12.6%. We found a moderate correlation (rs = 0.591, p < 0.05) between the amount of Mendeley readers and the amount of Scopus citations. The results showed a null correlation between the interactions received by the articles on Facebook (rs = - 0.129, p < 0.05) and on Twitter (rs = 0.141, p < 0.05) with the citations received by the articles in Scopus. The regression model showed that for each increase in the number of readers of an article on Mendeley, other parameters remaining fixed, there is an approximate increase of 0.7% in the number of citations of this article in Scopus. For each increase in the variable 'year', other parameters remaining fixed, there is an increase of approximately 39.8% in the number of citations received by an article in Scopus. Nursing journals posted on Facebook 31.3% of the articles published in 2019. The regression model showed that for each increase in the number of interactions in an article on Facebook, other parameters remaining fixed, there is an average increase of 2.2% in the number of citations in Scopus. Twitter posted 16.9% of the articles published by journals in 2019. It is evident the unequal nature of the type of impact that is measured by traditional metrics, based on citations, and alternative metrics, noticed on social media. We reaffirm what literature has already exposed: altmetrics can be used to complement, but not to replace, the impact measured by traditional metrics based on formal citations, allowing a broader perspective of how scientific communication processes take place in informal online environments.

Simbiosis entre indicadores bibliométricos y alternativos para un índice métrico integrado / Symbiosis of bibliometric and alternative indicators for an integrated metric index

RESUMEN Resulta un gran desafío encontrar una vía que le otorgue un valor real a las publicaciones científicas desde su impacto y calidad. Esta realidad exige el uso de indicadores bibliométricos y más reciente, algunos alternativos para la evaluación, tanto de los autores como de sus publicaciones. En este sentido se realiza un estudio de ambos sistemas de indicadores y sus metodologías, desde el análisis de debilidades y potencialidades para su integración en un único índice, de modo que permita una evaluación más integral y justa de su impacto en la comunidad científica. Se indagó además sobre la importancia, necesidad y nivel de información que se posee sobre este tema en profesores cubanos de varias universidades, durante el período 2018-2019. El objetivo del presente trabajo es argumentar algunas ideas para el acercamiento gradual del Sistema de Evaluación y Acreditación de la Educación Superior de la República de Cuba (SEAES) a estos indicadores, teniendo en cuenta el nivel de atención que reciben por bases de datos reconocidas globalmente. Los resultados son parte del proyecto de investigación El impacto social de la formación continua como parte de los procesos de mejora de la calidad en la Universidad de Camagüey.

ABSTRACT It is a great challenge to find a way that gives real value to scientific publications based on their impact and quality. This reality has required the use of bibliometric indicators and more recent some alternative ones for the evaluation of both the authors and their publications. In this sense, an analysis of both systems of indicators and their methodologies is carried out, from the analysis of weaknesses and potentialities for their integration in an only index, so that it allows a more comprehensive evaluation. and just about its impact on the scientific community. It also inquired about the importance, need and level of information that is possessed on this subject in Cuban university professors from various universities, during the period 2018-2019. The objective of the present work is to argue some ideas are proposed for the gradual approach of SEAES to these indicators, taking into account the level of attention they receive through globally recognized databases. The exposed results are part of the research project The social impact of continuous training as part of the quality improvement processes at the University of Camagüey.

What are the variables associated with Altmetric scores?

BACKGROUND: Social media has been used to disseminate the contents of scientific articles. To measure the impact of this, a new tool called Altmetric was created. Altmetric aims to quantify the impact of each article through online media. This systematic review aims to describe the associations between the publishing journal and published article variables and Altmetric scores. METHODS: Searches on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Cochrane Library were conducted. We extracted data related to both the publishing article and the publishing journal associated with Altmetric scores. The methodological quality of included articles was analyzed by the Appraisal Tool for Cross-sectional Studies. RESULTS: A total of 19 articles were considered eligible. These articles summarized a total of 573,842 studies. Citation counts, journal impact factor, access counts, papers published as open access, and press releases generated by the publishing journal were associated with Altmetric scores. The magnitude of these associations ranged from weak to strong. CONCLUSION: Citation counts and journal impact factor are the most common variables associated with Altmetric scores. Other variables such as access counts, papers published in open access journals, and the use of press releases are also likely to be associated with online media attention. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review does not contain health-related outcomes. Therefore, it is not eligible for registration.

Impacto académico y social de la investigación sobre COVID-19 en la base de datos Dimensions / Academic and social impact of COVID-19 research in Dimensions database

Introducción: La necesidad de contar de manera inmediata con evidencias y resultados fiables sobre la COVID-19 ha generado una revolución inédita en los sistemas de comunicación científica. Se trata de una verdadera carrera de la ciencia contra la expansión del nuevo coronavirus que genera impactos en todos los ámbitos. Objetivo: Analizar el impacto académico y social de los resultados científicos sobre COVID-19 en Dimensions. Material y Métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional y descriptivo, de carácter transversal, que analizó la presencia, productividad e influencia de investigaciones sobre COVID-19, su impacto y uso en plataformas sociales y científicas a través de indicadores bibliométricos y altmétricos. Resultados: El 84.3 por ciento son artículos publicados en revistas científicas, 14 por ciento corresponden a preprints y 82.2 por ciento de las publicaciones están en acceso abierto. Las publicaciones alcanzan un elevado número de citas y alta puntuación altmétrica con predominio de actividad en Twitter. Conclusiones: La investigación científica sobre COVID-19 se ha publicado, fundamentalmente, de forma directa y en abierto en repositorios temáticos e institucionales. Existen correlaciones en cuanto al impacto académico y social de trabajos publicados en revistas de alto impacto; sin embargo, el análisis a nivel de artículo evidencia una baja correspondencia entre citas y menciones en redes sociales(AU)

Introduction: The need for immediate evidence and reliable results of COVID-19 has generated an unprecedented revolution in scientific communication systems. It is a real race of science against the expansion of the new coronavirus that generates impacts in all areas. Objective: To analyze the academic and social impact of the scientific results of COVID-19 in Dimensions database. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional observational and descriptive study was conducted. The study analyzed the presence, productivity and influence of research on COVID-19, as well as its impact and use in social and scientific platforms through bibliometric and altmetric indicators. Results: In total, 84.3 percent are articles published in scientific journals, 14 percent correspond to preprints, and 82.2 percent of the publications are open access articles. The publications reach a high number of citations and high altmetric scores with a predominance of activity on Twitter. Conclusions: Scientific research on COVID-19 has been published, mainly directly and in openly available thematic or institutional repositories. There are correlations regarding the academic and social impact of works published in high impact journals; however, the analysis at the article level shows a low correspondence between citations and mentions on social networks(AU)

Global publication trends in ophthalmic genetics and gene therapy research: A Scientometric analysis / Tendências globais de publicação de pesquisas sobre genética oftálmica e terapia genética: uma análise cientométrica

ABSTRACT Objective: A scientometric analysis produced in ophthalmic genetics and gene therapy research is lacking. The purpose of this study is to present a holistic analysis of ophthalmic genetics literature. Methods: The data used in this study were obtained from the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection. All published documents between 1975-2019 were included. The data exported from WoS enabled the extensive details of ophthalmic genetics related literature including countries, institutions, authors, citations and keywords. Scientometric network maps of keywords and also country and institution co-authorships were created with free software. Global contributions of the countries to the ophthalmic genetics literature were shown by a graphic. Results: The search query revealed a total of 2322 documents. Most of the documents were original articles (75.75%). USA was the leading country by producing 45.39% of all documents in ophthalmic genetics research followed by UK, Germany, China and France. Pennsylvania University was the most contributing institution in the literature (5.25%) followed by University College London and Moorfields Eye Hospital. The average citations per item was 29.4. The most used keywords over a 40-year period were 'family', 'cell', 'photoreceptor' and 'expression'. Conclusions: USA and UK dominated the ophthalmic genetics research. A substantial increase in the number of published documents in this field were observed after 2010.

RESUMO Objetivo: A literatura carece de análise cienciométrica produzida em genética oftálmica e de pesquisa em terapia genética. O objetivo deste estudo é apresentar uma análise holística da literatura genética oftálmica. Métodos: Os dados utilizados neste estudo foram obtidos na base de dados Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection. Todos os documentos publicados entre 1975 e 2019 foram incluídos na análise. Os dados exportados da WoS viabilizaram acesso a amplos detalhes da literatura relacionada à genética oftálmica, incluindo países, instituições, autores, citações e palavras-chave. Mapas de rede cienciométrica foram criados por meio de software gratuito, com base em palavras-chave e em coautorias de países e instituições. As contribuições globais dos países para a literatura sobre genética oftálmica foram apresentadas em gráfico. Resultados: a busca por pesquisas revelou um total de 2.322 documentos cuja maioria eram artigos originais (75,75%). Os EUA foram o país que mais produziu artigos sobre o tema, com 45,39% de todos os documentos em pesquisa genética oftálmica; ele foi seguido pelo Reino Unido, Alemanha, China e França. A Universidade da Pensilvânia foi a instituição que mais contribuiu para a literatura (5,25%), e foi seguida pela University College London e pelo Moorfields Eye Hospital. A média de citações por item foi de 29,4. As palavras-chave mais usadas em um período de 40 anos foram 'família', 'célula', 'fotorreceptor' e 'expressão'. Conclusões: Os EUA e o Reino Unido dominaram a pesquisa em genética oftálmica. Após 2010, observou-se um aumento substancial no número de documentos publicados nessa área.

How do urogynecology and pelvic floor dysfunction terms used in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery research relate to social media indicators?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The association between social media (SoMe) indicators and citation metrics is still controversial. we aimed to evaluate the frequency of urogynecology-related terms ("urogynecology" [UG] and "pelvic floor/dysfunction" [PF/PFD]) mentioned by traditional databases (Web of Science [WOS]) and journal ranking indicators (SCImago), as well as their association with SoMe (Altmetric database). METHODS: In April 2019, two authors performed a search that was divided into three steps. The first one was to assess journals within the WOS Obstetrics/Gynecology and Urology categories updated to 2017 using UG and PF/PFD. The second step was to rank these studies in SCImago by the highest numbers of WOS and to correlate with journal h-index and SJR. The third step was to analyze SoMe indicators such as the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) for each study and journal retrieved. RESULTS: The International Urogynecology Journal (IUJ) and Neurourology and Urodynamics (NAU) were the first (n = 1,394) and second (n = 974) most highly cited journals when using UG and PFD. IUJ also presented manuscripts with the highest AAS for UG and PF/PFD. Social media represented 74-93% of AAS calculated among the 20 top cited studies. For UG, SoMe presented 8,050 mentions, led by Twitter (n = 7,326). The same distribution was seen for PFD (8,493 mentions for SoMe, Twitter with 7,653). The higher the WOS citation, the higher the AAS (r = 0.483; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: UG and PF/PFD terms are highly cited in databases and IUJ was the journal most frequently connected with them. Among SoMe tools, Twitter was the most frequently cited. WOS citations correlated with AAS.

Análisis métrico de la producción científica sobre COVID-19 en SCOPUS / Metric analysis of the scientific production about COVID-19 in Scopus

La investigación científica sobre COVID-19 es la actividad fundamental que se desarrolla actualmente. Es trascendental determinar la productividad y la visibilidad de los resultados de la investigación asociados a esta enfermedad. El presente trabajo tuvo como objetivo caracterizar la producción científica sobre COVID-19 en la base de datos SCOPUS en el período 2019-abril de 2020. Se trabajó con el universo constituido por la totalidad de los artículos publicados bajo la modalidad de acceso abierto sobre COVID-19. Se utilizaron indicadores bibliométricos (número de artículos, autores, año de publicación, SCImago Journal Rank, redes de coautorías y co-ocurrencia de términos e índice H) y altmétricos (número de citas y menciones en redes sociales y científicas). La producción científica total fue de 676 artículos. Predominó el idioma inglés, la autoría múltiple y la publicación en revistas del primer cuartil en Scimago (n= 655). Se registró un alto índice de colaboración (67 clústeres de autores con relaciones de coautoría de 1 a 7). El análisis de co-ocurrencia de términos arrojó 3 grandes grupos temáticos, principales focos emergentes de investigación sobre COVID-19, relacionados con la descripción del nuevo coronavirus, los estudios clínicos y los tratamientos propuestos. El 95 por ciento de las publicaciones ha recibido al menos una mención en las redes sociales y un número elevado de citas. La producción de artículos científicos sobre COVID-19 ha experimentado un crecimiento exponencial. Se caracteriza por el predominio de la colaboración científica, la publicación en revistas de alto impacto y la gran visibilidad en las redes sociales(AU)

Research about COVID-19 is the main scientific activity carried out at present. It is crucial to determine the productivity and visibility of research results associated to this disease. The purpose of the present study was to characterize the scientific production about COVID-19 recorded in the database Scopus in the period 2019 - April 2020. The study universe was all the open access papers about COVID-19 included in the database. The analysis was based on bibliometric indicators (number of papers, authors, year of publication, SJR, co-authorship networks and co-occurrence of terms and H index) and altmetric indicators (number of citations and mentions in social and scientific networks). Total scientific production was 676 papers. A predominance was found of the English language, multiple authorship and publication in SCImago first quartile journals (n= 655). A high rate of collaboration was observed (67 clusters of authors with co-authorship ratios of 1 to 7). Term co-occurrence analysis yielded 3 broad thematic groups, the main emerging research foci about COVID-19, related to description of the new coronavirus, clinical studies and treatments proposed. 95 percent of the publications have had at least one mention in social networks and a large number of citations. Production of scientific papers about COVID-19 has increased exponentially. It is characterized by a predominance of scientific collaboration, publication in high-impact journals and great visibility in social networks(AU)

Producción científica sobre COVID-19 y pediatría en Scopus (2019-julio de 2020) / Scientific production on COVID-19 and Pediatrics in Scopus (2019-July, 2020)

Introducción: La producción científica sobre COVID-19 muestra un ritmo de crecimiento sostenido y exponencial; sin embargo, no existen estudios bibliométricos que hayan caracterizado la producción científica específicamente en el área de pediatría. Objetivo: Caracterizar la producción científica sobre COVID-19 referida a pediatria a partir de las publicaciones registradas en la base de datos Scopus, como herramienta de apoyo a la población pediátrica. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio bibliométrico descriptivo durante el período 2019-julio de 2020. Se utilizó la base datos SCOPUS. Se recuperaron 791 artículos publicados, que se exportaron a una base de datos ad hoc en EndNote X9, para su normalización y luego de un proceso de depuración la muestra final quedó conformada por 681 artículos. Se aplicaron indicadores bibliométricos para el análisis de los datos. Se emplearon los softwares Bibexcel, Vosviewery Microsoft Excel 2019, para el procesamiento, análisis y visualización de los datos. Resultados: Se identificaron los países, autores, revistas y temáticas más productivos. Se analizaron las redes de colaboración nacional e internacional y temática. Se evaluó el impacto científico y social de los artículos, mediante las citas y menciones recibidas. Predominaron las publicaciones en idioma inglés, en revistas anglosajonas con elevada visibilidad internacional e impacto en redes sociales. Conclusiones: Las publicaciones sobre COVID-19 en pediatría en Scopus, muestran un ritmo de crecimiento sostenido, no obstante, se considera insuficiente el número de artículos con tratamientos específicos para la población pediátrica(AU)

Introduction: Scientific production on COVID-19 shows a continuous and exponential growth; however, there are not bibliometric studies that had characterized it, specifically in the field of Pediatrics. Objective: To characterize the scientific production on COVID-19 referred to Pediatrics from the publications recorded in SCOPUS database, as a support tool for the pediatric population. Methods: It was conducted a descriptive bibliometric study in the period 2019 to July, 2020. It was used Scopus database. 791 published articles were recovered, and those were exported to an ad hoc database in EndNote X9 for their normalization; and after a refinement process, the final sample was formed by 681 articles. There were used bibliometric indicators for the data analysis. Softwares as Bibexcel, Vosviewer, and Microsoft Excel 2019 were used for data processing, analysis and visualization. Results: The most productive countries, authors, journals and topics were identified. There were analysed the national and international collaboration networks and the topics. It was assessed the scientific and social impact of the articles through the quotes and mentions received. There was predominance of publications in English language, in Anglo-Saxon journals with high international visibility and impact in social media. Conclusions: Publications on COVID-19 in Pediatrics at SCOPUS show a continuous growth; however, it is consider as insufficient the number of articles on specific treatments for the pediatric population(AU)