Global panel data on World governance and state fragility from 2006 to 2022.

This global panel dataset contains information collected from two different sources (The Fund for Peace and World Bank), on the governance and stability levels of 178 countries between 2006 and 2022. The dataset includes information on 1) Cohesion (security apparatus (C1), factionalized elites (C2), and group grievance (C3)), 2) Economic (economy (E1), economic inequality (E2), and human flight and brain drain (E3)), 3) Political (state legitimacy (P1), public services (P2), and human rights (P3)) indicators, 4) Social and cross-cutting (demographic pressures (S1), refugees and internally displaced persons (S2), and external intervention (X1)), and 5) Governance (voice and accountability (G1), political stability and absence of violence/terrorism (G2), government effectiveness (G3), regulatory quality (G4), rule of law (G5), and control of corruption (G6)). Data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 29 software to ensure a complete description of the data (labels, type and measure of variables, and uniformity of decimals), as well as the imputation possibility of missing data, which will allow future researchers to study both cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between the five types of indicators and the eighteen indicators reported.

Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Coffee/Caffeine and Sport.

This article provides an empirical overview of coffee/caffeine studies in relation to sport worldwide, an incipient but growing relationship that has existed since 1938, although systematized over time since 1999. The extracted articles were examined using a bibliometric approach based on data from 160 records stored in the Web of Science (JCR) between 1938 and August 2021, applying traditional bibliometric laws and using VOSviewer for data and metadata processing. Among the results, these articles highlight an exponential increase in scientific production in the last two decades, with a concentration in only 12 specific journals, the hegemony of the USA among the co-authorship networks of worldwide relevance, and the thematic and temporal segregation of the concepts under study. This article concludes a high fragmentation of the authors with the highest level of scientific production and an evolution of almost 20 years in relevant thematic topics, and a concurrent concentration in three large blocks: (1) coffee consumption and risk factors, (2) health and coffee consumption, and (3) metabolism and sport correlated with the intake of coffee, which are distanced in time, providing evidence of an evolution that gives way to the irruption of alternative visions in the relationship of coffee and caffeine with sport.

A Scientometric Systematic Review of Entrepreneurial Wellbeing Knowledge Production.

This article presents a scientometric study regarding entrepreneurship and its relationship with wellbeing. The study presents a systematic review and measures impact and relational character to identify the relevance of countries, research organizations, and authors in the field of entrepreneurial wellbeing. The study poses the following research questions: What is the nature of the evolution of scientific knowledge in the entrepreneurial wellbeing field? What is the nature of the concentration in terms of geographical distribution and co-authorship level of knowledge production in the entrepreneurial wellbeing field? What are the knowledge trends in knowledge production for entrepreneurial wellbeing literature? The contribution of this research is two-fold. First, in terms of methodology, it contributes study into the use of a more robust approach to search for the scientometric trends about entrepreneurship wellbeing in addition to the PRISMA review tools and the PICOS eligibility criteria. Secondly, the study presents research updates in the search for results for the last 2 years of knowledge production. This upgrade is particularly important in a research field that presents exponential growth, where 2019 and 2020 presented almost double the amount of knowledge production compared to 2017 and 2018.