Cargando…
Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis
PURPOSE: This bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future, thereby informing research and educational practice. In particular, this analysis de...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7580500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33090330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00626-9 |
_version_ | 1783598807409229824 |
---|---|
author | Maggio, Lauren A. Costello, Joseph A. Norton, Candace Driessen, Erik W. Artino Jr, Anthony R. |
author_facet | Maggio, Lauren A. Costello, Joseph A. Norton, Candace Driessen, Erik W. Artino Jr, Anthony R. |
author_sort | Maggio, Lauren A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: This bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future, thereby informing research and educational practice. In particular, this analysis details the venues in which knowledge syntheses are published, the types of syntheses conducted, citation rates they produce, and altmetric attention they garner. METHOD: In 2020, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of knowledge syntheses published in 14 core medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. To characterize the studies, metadata were extracted from PubMed, Web of Science, Altmetrics Explorer, and Unpaywall. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 963 knowledge syntheses representing 3.1% of the total articles published (n = 30,597). On average, 45.9 knowledge syntheses were published annually (SD = 35.85, median = 33), and there was an overall 2620% increase in the number of knowledge syntheses published from 1999 to 2019. The journals each published, on average, a total of 68.8 knowledge syntheses (SD = 67.2, median = 41) with Medical Education publishing the most (n = 189; 19%). Twenty-one types of knowledge synthesis were identified, the most prevalent being systematic reviews (n = 341; 35.4%) and scoping reviews (n = 88; 9.1%). Knowledge syntheses were cited an average of 53.80 times (SD = 107.12, median = 19) and received a mean Altmetric Attention Score of 14.12 (SD = 37.59, median = 6). CONCLUSIONS: There has been considerable growth in knowledge syntheses in medical education over the past 20 years, contributing to medical education’s evidence base. Beyond this increase in volume, researchers have introduced methodological diversity in these publications, and the community has taken to social media to share knowledge syntheses. Implications for the field, including the impact of synthesis types and their relationship to knowledge translation, are discussed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40037-020-00626-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7580500 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Bohn Stafleu van Loghum |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75805002020-10-23 Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis Maggio, Lauren A. Costello, Joseph A. Norton, Candace Driessen, Erik W. Artino Jr, Anthony R. Perspect Med Educ Review Article PURPOSE: This bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future, thereby informing research and educational practice. In particular, this analysis details the venues in which knowledge syntheses are published, the types of syntheses conducted, citation rates they produce, and altmetric attention they garner. METHOD: In 2020, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of knowledge syntheses published in 14 core medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. To characterize the studies, metadata were extracted from PubMed, Web of Science, Altmetrics Explorer, and Unpaywall. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 963 knowledge syntheses representing 3.1% of the total articles published (n = 30,597). On average, 45.9 knowledge syntheses were published annually (SD = 35.85, median = 33), and there was an overall 2620% increase in the number of knowledge syntheses published from 1999 to 2019. The journals each published, on average, a total of 68.8 knowledge syntheses (SD = 67.2, median = 41) with Medical Education publishing the most (n = 189; 19%). Twenty-one types of knowledge synthesis were identified, the most prevalent being systematic reviews (n = 341; 35.4%) and scoping reviews (n = 88; 9.1%). Knowledge syntheses were cited an average of 53.80 times (SD = 107.12, median = 19) and received a mean Altmetric Attention Score of 14.12 (SD = 37.59, median = 6). CONCLUSIONS: There has been considerable growth in knowledge syntheses in medical education over the past 20 years, contributing to medical education’s evidence base. Beyond this increase in volume, researchers have introduced methodological diversity in these publications, and the community has taken to social media to share knowledge syntheses. Implications for the field, including the impact of synthesis types and their relationship to knowledge translation, are discussed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40037-020-00626-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2020-10-22 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7580500/ /pubmed/33090330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00626-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Maggio, Lauren A. Costello, Joseph A. Norton, Candace Driessen, Erik W. Artino Jr, Anthony R. Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis |
title | Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis |
title_full | Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis |
title_fullStr | Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis |
title_short | Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis |
title_sort | knowledge syntheses in medical education: a bibliometric analysis |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7580500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33090330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00626-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT maggiolaurena knowledgesynthesesinmedicaleducationabibliometricanalysis AT costellojosepha knowledgesynthesesinmedicaleducationabibliometricanalysis AT nortoncandace knowledgesynthesesinmedicaleducationabibliometricanalysis AT driessenerikw knowledgesynthesesinmedicaleducationabibliometricanalysis AT artinojranthonyr knowledgesynthesesinmedicaleducationabibliometricanalysis |