Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 62
Filter
3.
PLoS Biol ; 20(2): e3001285, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1662437

ABSTRACT

Amid the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, preprints in the biomedical sciences are being posted and accessed at unprecedented rates, drawing widespread attention from the general public, press, and policymakers for the first time. This phenomenon has sharpened long-standing questions about the reliability of information shared prior to journal peer review. Does the information shared in preprints typically withstand the scrutiny of peer review, or are conclusions likely to change in the version of record? We assessed preprints from bioRxiv and medRxiv that had been posted and subsequently published in a journal through April 30, 2020, representing the initial phase of the pandemic response. We utilised a combination of automatic and manual annotations to quantify how an article changed between the preprinted and published version. We found that the total number of figure panels and tables changed little between preprint and published articles. Moreover, the conclusions of 7.2% of non-COVID-19-related and 17.2% of COVID-19-related abstracts undergo a discrete change by the time of publication, but the majority of these changes do not qualitatively change the conclusions of the paper.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Information Dissemination/methods , Peer Review, Research/trends , Periodicals as Topic/trends , Publications/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Peer Review, Research/methods , Peer Review, Research/standards , Periodicals as Topic/standards , Periodicals as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Publications/standards , Publications/statistics & numerical data , Publishing/standards , Publishing/statistics & numerical data , Publishing/trends , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/physiology
5.
Br J Anaesth ; 128(1): 1-3, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525704

ABSTRACT

The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) had an eventful 2021, following what was a cataclysmic 2020 for the whole world. Despite the tragic challenges of multiple waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and the unparalleled burdens this created for everyone working in anaesthesia and critical care, the BJA underwent a major transformation during 2021. The BJA strongly supported research and education relevant to the pandemic, and to the broader missions of anaesthesia, critical, and pain medicine. Innovations to the BJA in 2021 included a special section on COVID-19 and the Anaesthetist; a new open access journal in the BJA stable; creation of a new social media editor position; new webinar and author interview series; transition to a new manuscript management system; and a move away from paper to electronic publication.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia , COVID-19 , Periodicals as Topic/trends , Anesthesiology , Humans , Publishing/trends , Social Media , United Kingdom
6.
J Korean Med Sci ; 36(22): e162, 2021 Jun 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1512015

ABSTRACT

Scholarly journals are hubs of hypotheses, evidence-based data, and practice recommendations that shape health research and practice worldwide. The advancement of science and information technologies has made online accessibility a basic requirement, paving the way for the advent of open access publishing, and more recently, to web-based health journalism. Especially in the time of the current pandemic, health professionals have turned to the internet, and primarily to social media, as a source of rapid information transfer and international communication. Hence, the current pandemic has ushered an era of digital transformation of science, and we attempt to understand and assess the impact of this digitization on modern health journalism.


Subject(s)
Journalism, Medical , Open Access Publishing , Social Media , COVID-19 , Humans , Internet , Pandemics , Publishing/trends
9.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0258064, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1458024

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has triggered an avalanche of research publications, the various aspects of which need to be assessed. The objective of this study is to determine the scientific community's response patterns to COVID-19 through a bibliometric analysis of the time-trends, global contribution, international collaboration, open-access provision, science domains of focus, and the behavior of journals. METHODS: The bibliographic records on COVID-19 literature were retrieved from both PubMed and Scopus. The period for searching was set from November 1, 2019, to April 15, 2021. The bibliographic data were coupled with COVID-19 incidence to explore possible association, as well as World Bank indicators and classification of economies. RESULTS: A total of 159132 records were included in the study. Following the escalation of incidences of COVID-19 in late 2020 and early 2021, the monthly publication count made a new peak in March 2021 at 20505. Overall, 125155 (78.6%) were national, 22548 (14.2%) were bi-national, and 11429 (7.2%) were multi-national. Low-income countries with 928 (66.8%) international publications had the highest percentage of international. The open-access provision decreased from 85.5% in February 2020 to 62.0% in April 2021. As many as 82841 (70.8%) publications were related to health sciences, followed by life sciences 27031 (23.1%), social sciences 20291 (17.3%), and physical sciences 15141 (12.9%). The top three medical subjects in publications were general internal medicine, public health, and infectious diseases with 28.9%, 18.3%, and 12.6% of medical publications, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The association between the incidence and publication count indicated the scientific community's interest in the ongoing situation and timely response to it. Only one-fifth of publications resulted from international collaboration, which might lead to redundancy without adding significant value. Our study underscores the necessity of policies for attraction of international collaboration and direction of vital funds toward domains of higher priority.


Subject(s)
Bibliometrics , COVID-19 , Biomedical Research , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Pandemics , PubMed , Public Health , Publishing/statistics & numerical data , Publishing/trends , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
11.
Nurs Adm Q ; 45(3): 175-176, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1450475
12.
Yearb Med Inform ; 30(1): 219-225, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1392953

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Provide an overview of the emerging themes and notable papers which were published in 2020 in the field of Bioinformatics and Translational Informatics (BTI) for the International Medical Informatics Association Yearbook. METHODS: A team of 16 individuals scanned the literature from the past year. Using a scoring rubric, papers were evaluated on their novelty, importance, and objective quality. 1,224 Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms extracted from these papers were used to identify themes and research focuses. The authors then used the scoring results to select notable papers and trends presented in this manuscript. RESULTS: The search phase identified 263 potential papers and central themes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), machine learning, and bioinformatics were examined in greater detail. CONCLUSIONS: When addressing a once in a centruy pandemic, scientists worldwide answered the call, with informaticians playing a critical role. Productivity and innovations reached new heights in both TBI and science, but significant research gaps remain.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Computational Biology , Machine Learning , Biological Specimen Banks , Computer Security , Publishing/trends , SARS-CoV-2
13.
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) ; 22(11): 840-847, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394701

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The spreading speed of the COVID-19 pandemic forced the medical community to produce efforts in updating and sharing the evidence about this new disease, trying to preserve the accuracy of the data but at the same time avoiding the potentially harmful delay from discovery to implementation. The aim of our analysis was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical literature in terms of proportion of COVID-19-related published papers and temporal patterns of publications within a sample of general/internal medicine and cardiology journals. METHODS: We searched through PubMed scientific papers published from 1 January 2020 to 31 January 2021 about COVID-19 in ten major medical journals, of which five were in general/internal medicine and five in the cardiology field. We analyzed the proportion of COVID-19-related papers, and we examined temporal trends in the number of published papers. RESULTS: Overall, the proportion of COVID-19-related papers was 18.5% (1986/10 756). This proportion was higher among the five selected general/internal medicine journals, compared with cardiology journals (23.8% vs 9.5%). The vast majority of papers were not original articles; in particular, in cardiology journals, there were 28% 'original articles', 17% 'review articles' and 55.1% 'miscellaneous', compared with 20.2%, 5.1% and 74.7% in general/internal medicine journals, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights the big impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international scientific literature. General and internal medicine journals were mainly involved, with cardiology journals only at a later time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Information Dissemination/methods , Publishing , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiology/methods , Humans , Internal Medicine/methods , Periodicals as Topic , Publishing/organization & administration , Publishing/trends , SARS-CoV-2
16.
CMAJ ; 193(30): E1198-E1199, 2021 08 03.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341519
18.
Front Immunol ; 12: 669539, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1259346

ABSTRACT

Acute lung injury (ALI) is an intractable disorder associated with macrophages. This bibliometric analysis was applied to identify the characteristics of global scientific output, the hotspots, and frontiers about macrophages in ALI over the past 10 years. We retrieved publications published from 2011 to 2020 and their recorded information from Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-expanded) of Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). Bibliometrix package was used to analyze bibliometric indicators, and the VOSviewer was used to visualize the trend and hotspots of researches on macrophages in ALI. Altogether, 2,632 original articles were reviewed, and the results showed that the annual number of publications (Np) concerning the role of macrophages in ALI kept increasing over the past 10 years. China produced the most papers, the number of citations (Nc) and H-index of the USA ranked first. Shanghai Jiaotong University and INT IMMUNOPHARMACOL were the most prolific affiliation and journal, respectively. Papers published by Matute-Bello G in 2011 had the highest local citation score (LCS). Recently, the keywords "NLRP3" and "extracellular vesicles" appeared most frequently. Besides, researches on COVID-19-induced ALI related to macrophages seemed to be the hotspot recently. This bibliometric study revealed that publications related to macrophages in ALI tend to increase continuously. China was a big producer and the USA was an influential country in this field. Most studies were mainly centered on basic researches in the past decade, and pathways associated with the regulatory role of macrophages in inhibiting and attenuating ALI have become the focus of attention in more recent studies. What is more, our bibliometric analysis showed that macrophages play an important role in COVID-19-induced ALI and may be a target for the treatment of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Acute Lung Injury/immunology , Bibliometrics , Macrophages/immunology , Acute Lung Injury/etiology , Asia , Brazil , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , Europe , Humans , North America , Publishing/trends , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Arch Pediatr ; 28(6): 464-469, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1252464

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: At the end of April 2020, three European pediatric societies published an alert on a new hyperinflammatory disorder linked to SARS-CoV-2. This disease has alternatively been called Kawasaki-like disease, pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection (PIMS-TS), and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). These alerts provide a clear starting point from which to study the early response of the medical and scientific community to a new disease in terms of scientific publications, and to compare the timeline of this response with levels of general public interest. To this aim, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of articles on this disease published between 1 April and 5 July 2020. METHOD: A literature search was performed using PubMed and in three preprint repositories. For each article, the name used for the disease in the title, the number of authors, the number of patients, the citations according to Google Scholar, the journal impact factor, and the Altmetric score were retrieved. Google search trends for the terms "Kawasaki" and "COVID," "COVID-19," and "coronavirus" were also retrieved, as was the number of Reuters news articles published on the topic. These data were compared longitudinally on a weekly basis. The quality of the reporting of the study was evaluated using the STROBE guidelines for observational studies with more than three patients and using the CARE guidelines for case reports of three or fewer patients. RESULTS: Eighty-six articles were included, among which ten were preprints (three of which were subsequently published) and 49 were clinical articles (57%). A total of 857 patients were described. The median number of authors per article was five (range, 1-45), the median number of patients was four (1-186), the median number of citations was one (0-170), the median Altmetric score was 12 (0-7242), and the median journal impact factor was 3.7 (1-74.7). For the clinical articles, the median percentage of STROBE or CARE checklist items satisfied was 70% (IQR, 56.75-79.25; range, 40-90). Guideline adherence was significantly higher for observational studies than for case reports (median percentage of checklist items satisfied, 78.5% vs 61.5%; P<0.001); however, guideline adherence did not differ significantly between peer-reviewed and preprint articles (median percentage of checklist items satisfied, 57% vs 72%; P=0.205). The only statistically significant difference between clinical articles and other types of articles was the number of authors (median, 7 vs 2; P=2.53E-9). Fifty-seven of the 86 articles were authored by researchers from just three countries (the USA, 31; France, 14; and the UK, 12). The names most frequently used in the title were Kawasaki-like disease (n=37), followed by MIS-C (n=27), PIM-TS (n=14), and other names involving the term "inflammatory" (n=12). Google searches for related terms peaked between weeks 18 and 21, following the initial alerts and decreased rapidly thereafter. The number of Reuters articles on the subject was correlated with Google search trends (ρ: 0.86, 95% CI [0.59; 0.96]; P=0.00016), but the number of medical articles published was not (ρ: -0.54, 95% CI [-0.87; 0.14]; P=0.11). The first small case series was published less than 2 weeks after the initial alert; however, if all articles had been deposited as preprints when they were submitted to journals, the cumulative number of reported cases would have been 300% higher in week 18 (3 vs 1), 400% higher in week 19 (44 vs 11), 70% higher in week 20 (124 vs 73), and 54% higher in week 21 (129 vs 84). CONCLUSION: In a period of 9 weeks after the initial alerts from European pediatric societies, 85 medical articles were published, involving 856 patients (one case report was published before the alerts), allowing rapid dissemination of research information. However, general public interest followed the news cycle rather than scientific releases. The quality of the reporting, as assessed by adherence to STROBE or CARE guidelines, was adequate with more than two-thirds of checklist items satisfied. Learned societies play an important role in the early dissemination of up-to-date peer-reviewed information. Preprint deposition should be encouraged to accelerate the dissemination of research information.


Subject(s)
Bibliometrics , COVID-19 , Publishing/trends , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome , Child , Humans , MEDLINE , Pandemics
20.
Am J Public Health ; 111(1): 159-163, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216986

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To investigate the rate of manuscript submission to a major peer-reviewed journal (American Journal of Public Health) by gender, comparing periods before and during the pandemic.Methods. We used data from January 1 to May 12, 2020, and defined the start of the pandemic period by country as the first date of 50 or more confirmed cases. We used an algorithm to classify gender based on first name and nation of origin. We included authors whose gender could be estimated with a certainty of at least 95%.Results. Submission rates were higher overall during the pandemic compared with before. Increases were higher for submissions from men compared with women (41.9% vs 10.9% for corresponding author). For the United States, submissions increased 23.8% for men but only 7.9% for women. Women authored 29.4% of COVID-19-related articles.Conclusions. Our findings suggest that the pandemic exacerbated gender imbalances in scientific research.


Subject(s)
Authorship , Bibliometrics , COVID-19 , Public Health , Publishing/trends , Female , Global Health , Humans , Male , Sex Distribution
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL