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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |