Cargando…

Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a bibliometric analysis of Letters to the Editor published on the Zika virus from 1952–2018. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted using the terms (Zika OR ZIKV). Results were limited to 1952–2018 and Publication Type = Letter. Results were exported to EndNote, and the full te...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Delwiche, Frances A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: University Library System, University of Pittsburgh 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8270370/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34285673
http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.903
_version_ 1783720790210904064
author Delwiche, Frances A.
author_facet Delwiche, Frances A.
author_sort Delwiche, Frances A.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To conduct a bibliometric analysis of Letters to the Editor published on the Zika virus from 1952–2018. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted using the terms (Zika OR ZIKV). Results were limited to 1952–2018 and Publication Type = Letter. Results were exported to EndNote, and the full text of each Letter examined. Each Letter was assigned to one of five categories: Reader Response, Author Reply, Observation, Case Report, or Research. Additional study parameters included number of authors, number of references, use of graphics, and funding. Citation reports were generated for each category and the entire dataset, producing lists sorted by Times Cited. RESULTS: Of 499 Letters, only 15 (3.0%) were published before 2016. In 2016, at the height of the Zika virus epidemic in the Americas, 244 (48.9%) Letters were published, dropping to 145 (29.1%) in 2017 and 95 (19.0%) in 2018. Letters included 149 (29.9%) Reader Responses, 56 (11.2%) Author Replies, 112 (22.4%) Observations, 70 (14.0%) Case Reports, and 112 (22.4%) Research. The Letters were written by 1–35 authors; 369 (74.0%) Letters had 1–5 authors, and 130 (26.0%) had 6 or more. The Letters cited 0–63 references, with an average of 7.0 per Letter. Graphics appeared in 192 (38.5%) Letters, and 77 (15.4%) Letters reported funding. An interesting anomaly was the 104 (20.8%) Letters authored or co-authored by 1 individual. CONCLUSION: Letters to the Editor remain an important component of scientific communication and may serve as a valuable source of clinical and research information.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8270370
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82703702021-07-19 Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis Delwiche, Frances A. J Med Libr Assoc Original Investigation OBJECTIVE: To conduct a bibliometric analysis of Letters to the Editor published on the Zika virus from 1952–2018. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted using the terms (Zika OR ZIKV). Results were limited to 1952–2018 and Publication Type = Letter. Results were exported to EndNote, and the full text of each Letter examined. Each Letter was assigned to one of five categories: Reader Response, Author Reply, Observation, Case Report, or Research. Additional study parameters included number of authors, number of references, use of graphics, and funding. Citation reports were generated for each category and the entire dataset, producing lists sorted by Times Cited. RESULTS: Of 499 Letters, only 15 (3.0%) were published before 2016. In 2016, at the height of the Zika virus epidemic in the Americas, 244 (48.9%) Letters were published, dropping to 145 (29.1%) in 2017 and 95 (19.0%) in 2018. Letters included 149 (29.9%) Reader Responses, 56 (11.2%) Author Replies, 112 (22.4%) Observations, 70 (14.0%) Case Reports, and 112 (22.4%) Research. The Letters were written by 1–35 authors; 369 (74.0%) Letters had 1–5 authors, and 130 (26.0%) had 6 or more. The Letters cited 0–63 references, with an average of 7.0 per Letter. Graphics appeared in 192 (38.5%) Letters, and 77 (15.4%) Letters reported funding. An interesting anomaly was the 104 (20.8%) Letters authored or co-authored by 1 individual. CONCLUSION: Letters to the Editor remain an important component of scientific communication and may serve as a valuable source of clinical and research information. University Library System, University of Pittsburgh 2021-04-01 2021-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8270370/ /pubmed/34285673 http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.903 Text en Copyright © 2021 Frances A. Delwiche https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Delwiche, Frances A.
Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
title Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
title_full Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
title_fullStr Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
title_full_unstemmed Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
title_short Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
title_sort letters to the editor on the zika virus: a bibliometric analysis
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8270370/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34285673
http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.903
work_keys_str_mv AT delwichefrancesa letterstotheeditoronthezikavirusabibliometricanalysis