Cargando…
The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Research collaborations in biomedical research have evolved over time. No studies have addressed research collaboration in network meta-analysis (NMA). In this study, we used social network analysis methods to characterize global collaboration patterns of published NMAs ove...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5042468/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27685998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163239 |
_version_ | 1782456595572064256 |
---|---|
author | Li, Lun Catalá-López, Ferrán Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Tian, Jinhui Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael Pieper, Dawid Ge, Long Yao, Liang Wang, Quan Yang, Kehu |
author_facet | Li, Lun Catalá-López, Ferrán Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Tian, Jinhui Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael Pieper, Dawid Ge, Long Yao, Liang Wang, Quan Yang, Kehu |
author_sort | Li, Lun |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Research collaborations in biomedical research have evolved over time. No studies have addressed research collaboration in network meta-analysis (NMA). In this study, we used social network analysis methods to characterize global collaboration patterns of published NMAs over the past decades. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched (at 9(th) July, 2015) to include systematic reviews incorporating NMA. Two reviewers independently selected studies and cross-checked the standardized data. Data was analyzed using Ucinet 6.0 and SPSS 17.0. NetDraw software was used to draw social networks. RESULTS: 771 NMAs published in 336 journals from 3459 authors and 1258 institutions in 49 countries through the period 1997–2015 were included. More than three-quarters (n = 625; 81.06%) of the NMAs were published in the last 5-years. The BMJ (4.93%), Current Medical Research and Opinion (4.67%) and PLOS One (4.02%) were the journals that published the greatest number of NMAs. The UK and the USA (followed by Canada, China, the Netherlands, Italy and Germany) headed the absolute global productivity ranking in number of NMAs. The top 20 authors and institutions with the highest publication rates were identified. Overall, 43 clusters of authors (four major groups: one with 37 members, one with 12 members, one with 11 members and one with 10 members) and 21 clusters of institutions (two major groups: one with 62 members and one with 20 members) were identified. The most prolific authors were affiliated with academic institutions and private consulting firms. 181 consulting firms and pharmaceutical industries (14.39% of institutions) were involved in 199 NMAs (25.81% of total publications). Although there were increases in international and inter-institution collaborations, the research collaboration by authors, institutions and countries were still weak and most collaboration groups were small sizes. CONCLUSION: Scientific production on NMA is increasing worldwide with research leadership of Western countries (most notably, the UK, the USA and Canada). More authors, institutions and nations are becoming involved in research collaborations, but frequently with limited international collaborations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5042468 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50424682016-10-27 The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis Li, Lun Catalá-López, Ferrán Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Tian, Jinhui Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael Pieper, Dawid Ge, Long Yao, Liang Wang, Quan Yang, Kehu PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Research collaborations in biomedical research have evolved over time. No studies have addressed research collaboration in network meta-analysis (NMA). In this study, we used social network analysis methods to characterize global collaboration patterns of published NMAs over the past decades. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched (at 9(th) July, 2015) to include systematic reviews incorporating NMA. Two reviewers independently selected studies and cross-checked the standardized data. Data was analyzed using Ucinet 6.0 and SPSS 17.0. NetDraw software was used to draw social networks. RESULTS: 771 NMAs published in 336 journals from 3459 authors and 1258 institutions in 49 countries through the period 1997–2015 were included. More than three-quarters (n = 625; 81.06%) of the NMAs were published in the last 5-years. The BMJ (4.93%), Current Medical Research and Opinion (4.67%) and PLOS One (4.02%) were the journals that published the greatest number of NMAs. The UK and the USA (followed by Canada, China, the Netherlands, Italy and Germany) headed the absolute global productivity ranking in number of NMAs. The top 20 authors and institutions with the highest publication rates were identified. Overall, 43 clusters of authors (four major groups: one with 37 members, one with 12 members, one with 11 members and one with 10 members) and 21 clusters of institutions (two major groups: one with 62 members and one with 20 members) were identified. The most prolific authors were affiliated with academic institutions and private consulting firms. 181 consulting firms and pharmaceutical industries (14.39% of institutions) were involved in 199 NMAs (25.81% of total publications). Although there were increases in international and inter-institution collaborations, the research collaboration by authors, institutions and countries were still weak and most collaboration groups were small sizes. CONCLUSION: Scientific production on NMA is increasing worldwide with research leadership of Western countries (most notably, the UK, the USA and Canada). More authors, institutions and nations are becoming involved in research collaborations, but frequently with limited international collaborations. Public Library of Science 2016-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5042468/ /pubmed/27685998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163239 Text en © 2016 Li et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Li, Lun Catalá-López, Ferrán Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Tian, Jinhui Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael Pieper, Dawid Ge, Long Yao, Liang Wang, Quan Yang, Kehu The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis |
title | The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis |
title_full | The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis |
title_fullStr | The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis |
title_short | The Global Research Collaboration of Network Meta-Analysis: A Social Network Analysis |
title_sort | global research collaboration of network meta-analysis: a social network analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5042468/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27685998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163239 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lilun theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT catalalopezferran theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT alonsoarroyoadolfo theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT tianjinhui theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT aleixandrebenaventrafael theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT pieperdawid theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT gelong theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT yaoliang theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT wangquan theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT yangkehu theglobalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT lilun globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT catalalopezferran globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT alonsoarroyoadolfo globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT tianjinhui globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT aleixandrebenaventrafael globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT pieperdawid globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT gelong globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT yaoliang globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT wangquan globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis AT yangkehu globalresearchcollaborationofnetworkmetaanalysisasocialnetworkanalysis |