Cargando…

Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls

During the last decades, the emergence of Bibliometrics and the progress in Pain research have led to a proliferation of bibliometric studies on the medical and scientific literature of pain (B/P). This study charts the evolution of the B/P literature published during the last 30 years. Using variou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Robert, Claude, Wilson, Concepción Shimizu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10017016/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36937565
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2023.1071453
_version_ 1784907488237191168
author Robert, Claude
Wilson, Concepción Shimizu
author_facet Robert, Claude
Wilson, Concepción Shimizu
author_sort Robert, Claude
collection PubMed
description During the last decades, the emergence of Bibliometrics and the progress in Pain research have led to a proliferation of bibliometric studies on the medical and scientific literature of pain (B/P). This study charts the evolution of the B/P literature published during the last 30 years. Using various searching techniques, 189 B/P studies published from 1993 to August 2022 were collected for analysis—half were published since 2018. Most of the selected B/P publications use classic bibliometric analysis of Pain in toto, while some focus on specific types of Pain with Headache/Migraine, Low Back Pain, Chronic Pain, and Cancer Pain dominating. Each study is characterized by the origin (geographical, economical, institutional, …) and the medical/scientific context over a specified time span to provide a detailed landscape of the Pain research literature. Some B/P studies have been developed to pinpoint difficulties in appropriately identifying the Pain literature or to highlight some general publishing pitfalls. Having observed that most of the recent B/P studies have integrated newly emergent software visualization tools (SVTs), we found an increase of anomalies and suggest that readers exercise caution when interpreting results in the B/P literature details.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10017016
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100170162023-03-16 Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls Robert, Claude Wilson, Concepción Shimizu Front Pain Res (Lausanne) Pain Research During the last decades, the emergence of Bibliometrics and the progress in Pain research have led to a proliferation of bibliometric studies on the medical and scientific literature of pain (B/P). This study charts the evolution of the B/P literature published during the last 30 years. Using various searching techniques, 189 B/P studies published from 1993 to August 2022 were collected for analysis—half were published since 2018. Most of the selected B/P publications use classic bibliometric analysis of Pain in toto, while some focus on specific types of Pain with Headache/Migraine, Low Back Pain, Chronic Pain, and Cancer Pain dominating. Each study is characterized by the origin (geographical, economical, institutional, …) and the medical/scientific context over a specified time span to provide a detailed landscape of the Pain research literature. Some B/P studies have been developed to pinpoint difficulties in appropriately identifying the Pain literature or to highlight some general publishing pitfalls. Having observed that most of the recent B/P studies have integrated newly emergent software visualization tools (SVTs), we found an increase of anomalies and suggest that readers exercise caution when interpreting results in the B/P literature details. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10017016/ /pubmed/36937565 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2023.1071453 Text en © 2023 Robert and Wilson. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Pain Research
Robert, Claude
Wilson, Concepción Shimizu
Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
title Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
title_full Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
title_fullStr Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
title_full_unstemmed Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
title_short Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
title_sort thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: analysis, evolution, and pitfalls
topic Pain Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10017016/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36937565
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2023.1071453
work_keys_str_mv AT robertclaude thirtyyearsurveyofbibliometricsusedintheresearchliteratureofpainanalysisevolutionandpitfalls
AT wilsonconcepcionshimizu thirtyyearsurveyofbibliometricsusedintheresearchliteratureofpainanalysisevolutionandpitfalls