Coronavirus disease 2019: a bibliometric analysis and review

Digital Transformation and Open Innovation Planning of Response to COVID-19 Outbreak: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the importance of digital technology in a specific region's epidemic prevention and control, and the digital transformation strategy based on the open innovation system is an emerging way to tackle conceivable outbreaks. Based on the bibliometric study of relevant literature data, this paper evaluated the research and development status in this field, and conducted a systematic literature review on the basis of the core articles identified. The results of bibliometric analysis software, including CiteSpace, CitNetExplorer and VOSViewer, showed that the development of relevant research presented rapidity and decentralization, and the evolution process of literature topics further implies the necessity of interdisciplinary and multisectoral collaboration. Furthermore, this paper summarized the specific implementation strategies for constructing an open innovation system, and discussed the role and development plan of digital technology in epidemic prevention and control.

Radiology During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Mapping Radiology Literature in 2020

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to assess articles published in the field of radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging in 2020 and analyze the linkage of radiology-related topics with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) through literature mapping along with a bibliometric analysis for publications.

METHODS

We performed a search on the Web of Science Core Collection database for articles in the field of radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging published in 2020. We analyzed the included articles using VOS viewer software, where we analyzed the co-occurrence of keywords, representing major topics discussed. Of the resulting topics, a literature map was created and linkage analysis was done.

RESULTS

A total of 24,748 articles were published in the field of radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging in 2020. We found a total of 61,267 keywords; only 78 keywords occurred more than 250 times. COVID-19 had 449 occurrences, 29 links, with a total link strength of 271. MRI was the topic most commonly appearing in 2020 radiology publications, while "computed tomography" had the highest linkage strength with COVID-19, with a linkage strength of 149, representing 54.98% of the total COVID-19 linkage strength, followed by "radiotherapy, and "deep and machine learning". The top cited paper had a total of 1,687 citations. Nine out of the 10 most cited articles discussed COVID-19 and included "COVID-19" or "coronavirus" in their title, including the top cited paper.

CONCLUSION

While MRI was the topic that dominated, CT had the highest linkage strength with COVID-19 and represented the topic of top cited articles in 2020 radiology publications.

Differences in Global Scientific Production Between New mRNA and Conventional Vaccines Against COVID-19

The search for effective vaccines to stop the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented amount of global scientific production and activity. This study aimed to analyze global scientific production on the different vaccine types (mRNA and conventional) that were validated for COVID-19 during the years 2020-2021. The scientific production generated on COVID-19 vaccines during the period 2020-2021 totaled the enormous amount of 20,459 studies published. New mRNA vaccines clearly showed higher production levels than conventional vaccines (viral and inactivated vectors), with 786 and 350 studies, respectively. The USA is the undisputed leader in the global production on COVID-19 vaccines, with Israel and Italy also playing an important role. Among the journals publishing works in this field, the New England Journal of Medicine, the British Medical Journal, and Vaccines stand out from the rest as the most important. The keyword 'immunogenicity' and its derivatives have been more researched for the new mRNA vaccines, while thrombosis has been more studied for conventional vaccines. The massive scientific production generated on COVID-19 vaccines in only two years has shown the enormous gravity of the pandemic and the extreme urgency to find a solution. This high scientific production and the main keywords found for the mRNA vaccines indicate the great potential that these vaccines have against COVID-19 and future infectious diseases. Moreover, this study provides valuable information for guiding future research lines and promoting international collaboration for an effective solution.

Can anti-parasitic drugs help control COVID-19?

Novel COVID-19 is a public health emergency that poses a serious threat to people worldwide. Given the virus spreading so quickly, novel antiviral medications are desperately needed. Repurposing existing drugs is the first strategy. Anti-parasitic drugs were among the first to be considered as a potential treatment option for this disease. Even though many papers have discussed the efficacy of various anti-parasitic drugs in treating COVID-19 separately, so far, no single study comprehensively discussed these drugs. This study reviews some anti-parasitic recommended drugs to treat COVID-19, in terms of function and in vitro as well as clinical results. Finally, we briefly review the advanced techniques, such as artificial intelligence, that have been used to find effective drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.

COVID-19 and Pregnancy: Citation Network Analysis and Evidence Synthesis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 spread quickly around the world shortly after the first outbreaks of the new coronavirus disease at the end of December 2019, affecting all populations, including pregnant women.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between different publications on COVID-19 in pregnancy and their authors through citation networks, as well as to identify the research areas and to determine the publication that has been the most highly cited.

METHODS

The search for publications was carried out through the Web of Science database using terms such as "pregnancy," "SARS-CoV-2," "pregnant," and "COVID-19" for the period between January and December 2020. Citation Network Explorer software was used for publication analysis and VOSviewer software was used to construct the figures. This approach enabled an in-depth network analysis to visualize the connections between the related elements and explain their network structure.

RESULTS

A total of 1330 publications and 5531 citation networks were identified in the search, with July being the month with the largest number of publications, and the United States, China, and England as the countries with the greatest number of publications. The most cited publication was "Clinical characteristics and intrauterine vertical transmission potential of COVID-19 infection in nine pregnant women: a retrospective review of medical records" by Chen and colleagues, which was published in March 2020. Six groups identified as being close in the citation network reflect multidisciplinary research, including clinical characteristics and outcomes in pregnancy, vertical transmission, delivery mode, and psychological impacts of the pandemic on pregnant women.

CONCLUSIONS

Thousands of articles on COVID-19 have been published in several journals since the disease first emerged. Identifying relevant publications and obtaining a global view of the main papers published on COVID-19 and pregnancy can lead to a better understanding of the topic. With the accumulation of scientific knowledge, we now know that the clinical features of COVID-19 during pregnancy are generally similar to those of infected nonpregnant women. There is a small increase in frequency of preterm birth and cesarean birth, related to severe maternal illness. Vaccination for all pregnant women is recommended. Several agents are being evaluated for the treatment of COVID-19, but with minimal or no information on safety in pregnancy. These results could form the basis for further research. Future bibliometric and scientometric studies on COVID-19 should provide updated information to analyze other relevant indicators in this field.

Bibliometric Analysis of International Scientific Production on Pharmacologic Treatments for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 During 2020

Background

COVID-19 is causing a grave global health and economic crisis and the fight against the pandemic has led to unprecedented scientific activity. Bibliometrics could be a useful tool for guiding future researches lines and promoting international collaboration for an effective treatment. For this purpose, we have conducted a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications on drugs and therapies used to treat COVID-19 during 2020.

Methods

Data source: Web of Science. We gathered data on scientific production relating to drugs used to treat COVID-19. We calculated impact factors and analyzed production by institution, country, and journal, visualizing our results in bibliometric networks.

Results

In 1 year, production relating to COVID-19 exceeded 100 000 publications, with over 6,500 on Drugs and COVID-19. Research into hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, remdesivir, lopinavir and ritonavir, tocilizumab and convalescent plasma is particularly noteworthy. Mean citations/study range from 11.9 to 15.4. Producer institutions fall into three groups: one in the US and centered on Harvard Medical School; another in Europe led by INSERS; and another in China led by Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Production by journal is widespread but the Journal of Medical Virology, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, and American Journal of Transplantation are noteworthy.

Conclusions

The volume of research that is currently under way is comparable to the magnitude of the pandemic itself. Such a high volume of studies is infrequent and the impact they have achieved has no known precedent. The producing countries are those with highest incidence of the pandemic and greatest scientific potential; moreover, inter-agency and international collaboration has reached extraordinarily high levels.

A Bibliometric Analysis on Global Psychological and Behavioral Research Landscape on COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak in December 2019 has spread globally. The ongoing psychological and behavioral effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, which poses a major challenge to humanity, are of concern to researchers. To understand the academic community’s attention, focus and research collaboration on psychological and behavioral research during the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a macro analysis using a bibliometric approach. Using the topic selection strategy of TS = (“COVID-19” OR “coronavirus disease 2019” OR “SARS-CoV-2” OR “2019-nCoV”) AND TS = (“behavio*”) AND TS = (“psycholog*”), 2096 high-quality research articles and reviews were downloaded as data from the Web of Science core collection on 16 November 2021. Through analysis and visualization, the following conclusions are drawn in this study: (1) The popularity and importance of psychological and behavioral research under COVID-19 has increased significantly and needs further attention; (2). Related research focuses on eight hotspots, with quarantine, health care workers, the elderly, students, pregnant women, family, consumers, social media and emergency preparedness knowledge as the focus of the research object; and (3) Research collaboration is relatively high at the author, organizational and national levels. However, low-income countries need to get more attention. Furthermore, this article would help researchers make decisions for the research of psychological and behavioral issues under COVID-19 and planning for future prospects to contribute to academic development and applied methodology.

COVID-19, Influenza, and Other Acute Respiratory Viral Infections: Etiology, Immunopathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Part 2. Other Acute Respiratory Viral Infections

The first part of this paper presented the current knowledge on two very significant respiratory diseases with high pandemic potential, COVID-19 and influenza. The second part reviews other pathogens that cause acute respiratory viral infections, ARVI, including parainfluenza viruses, adenoviruses, pneumoviruses and specifically respiratory syncytial virus, enteroviruses, rhinoviruses, bocaviruses, and seasonal coronaviruses. The review presents modern data on the structure and replication of viruses, epidemiology and immunopathogenesis of diseases, diagnostics, preventive vaccination, and antiviral drugs. Topical issues regarding ARVI vaccination and the search for new broad-spectrum antiviral drugs are discussed.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 during air travel: a descriptive and modelling study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the potential of SARS-CoV-2 spread during air travel and the risk of in-flight transmission.

METHODS

We enrolled all passengers and crew suspected of being infected with SARS-CoV-2, who bounded for Beijing on international flights. We specified the characteristics of all confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection and utilised Wells-Riley equation to estimate the infectivity of COVID-19 during air travel.

RESULTS

We screened 4492 passengers and crew with suspected COVID-19 infection, verified 161 confirmed cases (mean age 28.6 years), and traced two confirmed cases who may have been infected in the aircraft. The estimated infectivity was 375 quanta/h (range 274-476), while the effective infectivity was only 4 quanta/h (range 2-5). The risk of per-person infection during a 13 h air travel in economy class was 0.56‰ (95% CI 0.41‰-0.72‰).

CONCLUSION

We found that the universal use of face masks on the flight, together with the plane's ventilation system, significantly decreased the infectivity of COVID-19.KEY MESSAGESThe COVID-19 pandemic is changing the lifestyle in the world, especially air travel which has the potential to spread SARS-CoV-2.The universal use of face masks on the flight, together with the plane's ventilation system, significantly decreased the infectivity of COVID-19 on an aircraft.Our findings suggest that the risk of infection in aircraft was negligible.

COVID 19 Scoping: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction:

The world has faced the pandemic of COVID-19 in the march of 2020 and still it continues to effect in 2021. Hence, in the present study we aim to evaluate the gulps in the research so that certain recommendations can be made for the future research. We conducted a scoping review of the COVID meta-analysis.

Materials and Methods:

Online data was collected from the search engines of EBSCO, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus. The searched terms were COVID-19, CORONA, SARS-CoV-2, clinical features, Wuhan, etc. The study articles were collected that from January 2020 to February 2021. Based on the PRISMA guidelines, the meta-analysis was performed.

Results:

In the present study, we finalized 316 articles. On February 2020, the first article was published. We observed a spike in the meta-analysis later on. Most of the meta-analysis were issued in the virology and infection magazines. As expected, the majority studies were from Wuhan. The other countries that published the meta-analysis were the USA, the UK, and Italy. The studies included in each meta-analysis were nearly 25 and the subjects were approximately 16 thousand. However, we noticed a poor quality in majority of these meta-analysis and <10% of all the meta-analysis showed higher confidence.

Conclusion:

A poor quality of the meta-analysis has predominated the data and very few are of high quality. All the journal editors and the reviewing team should verify and thoroughly organize the protocol so that only high quality meta-analysis are encouraged.

The promising drugs included in WHO's Solidarity Project: a choice based in scientific knowledge and institutional competencies

BACKGROUND

In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the Solidarity Program, probably the largest global initiative to encourage and support research in four promising drugs, named Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, β Interferon and the combination Lopinavir / Ritonavir, to reduce the mortality of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

OBJECTIVES

Considering the potential impact of Solidarity Program to restrain the current pandemic, the present study aims to investigate whether it was designed upon indicators of scientific productivity, defined as the level of the production of new scientific knowledge and of the institutional capabilities, estimated in terms of scientific publications and technological agreements.

METHODS

The scientific documents on Alphacoronavirus, Betacoronavirus, Gammacoronavirus and Coronavirus were retrieved from Scopus database while the technological agreements on coronavirus were obtained through Cortellis. As for the institutions and countries, we have considered the data on author's affiliations in both set of data. For comparison, we included the analysis of documents related with other drugs or therapies, such as vaccines and antibodies, which were listed in a Clarivate's report on coronaviruses research.

FINDINGS

Most of the analysis refers to documents on Coronavirus, the largest group. The number of documents related to WHO's drugs are almost five times higher than in the other groups. This subset of documents involves the largest and most diverse number of institutions and countries. As for agreements, we observed a smaller number of institutions involved in it, suggesting differences between countries in terms of technical and human capabilities to develop basic and/or clinical research on coronavirus and to develop new forms or products to treat or to prevent the disease.

MAIN CONCLUSIONS

Hence, the results shown in this study illustrate that decisions taken by an international scientific body, as WHO, were mainly based in scientific knowledge and institutional competencies.

Measuring the funding landscape of COVID-19 research

Purpose

The purpose of the study is to map the funding status of COVID-19 research. The various aspects, such as funding ratio, geographical distribution of funded articles, journals publishing funded research and institutions that sponsor the COVID-19 research are studied. To visualize the country collaboration network and research trends/hotspots in the field of COVID-19 funded research, keyword analysis is also performed. The open-access (OA) status of the funded research on COVID-19 is also discussed.

Design/methodology/approach

The leading indexing and abstracting database, i.e. Web of Science (WoS), was used to retrieve the funded articles published on the topic COVID-19. The scientometric approach, more particularly “funding acknowledgment analysis (FAA),” was used to study the research funding.

Findings

A total of 5,546 publications of varied nature have been published on COVID-19, of which 1,760 are funded, thus indicating a funding ratio of 32%. China is the leading producer of funded research (760, 43.182%) on COVID-19 followed by the USA (482, 27.386%), England (179, 10.17%), Italy (119, 6.761%), Germany (107, 6.08%) and Canada (107, 6.08%). China is also in lead in terms of the funding ratio (60.94%). However, the funding ratio of the USA (31.54%) is at 11th rank behind Canada (40.68%), Germany (34.18%) and England (35.87%). The USA occupies a central position in the collaboration network having the highest score of articles with other countries (n = 489), with the USA–China collaboration ranking first (n = 123). National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) is the largest source of funding for COVID-19 research, supporting 342 (19.432%) publications, followed by the United States Department of Health Human Services (DHHS) and National Institute of Health (NIH), USA with 211 (11.989%) and 200 (11.364%) publications, respectively. However, China's National Key Research and Development Program achieves the highest citation impact (80.24) for its funded publications. Journal of Medical Virology, Science of the Total Environment and EuroSurveillance are the three most prolific journals publishing 63 (3.58%), 35 (1.989%) and 32 (1.818%), respectively, of the sponsored research articles on the COVID-19. A total of 3,138 institutions produce funded articles with Huazhong University of Science Technology and Wuhan University from China at the forefront publishing 92 (5.227%) and 83 (4.716%) publications, respectively. The funded research on COVID-19 is largely available in OA mode (1,674, 95.11%) and mainly through the Green and Bronze routes. The keyword clustering reveals that the articles mainly focus on the impact, structure and clinical characteristics of the virus.

Research limitations/implications

The study's main limitation is that the results are based on the publications indexed by WoS, which has limited coverage compared to other databases. Moreover, all the funding agencies do not require or authors miss to acknowledge funding sources in their publications, which ultimately undermines the number of funded publications. The research publications on COVID-19 are also proliferating; thus, the study's findings shall be valid for a minimum period.

Practical implications

The funding of research on the COVID-19 is highly essential to accelerate innovative research and help countries fight against the global pandemic. The study's findings reflect the efforts made by nations and institutions to remove the financial and accessibility hurdles. It not only underscores the lead of the USA in the research on COVID-19, but also shows China as a forerunner in sponsoring the research, thus, helping to know the contribution of nations toward understanding the dynamics of pandemic and controlling it. The study will help healthcare practitioners and policymakers recognize the areas that remain the focus of sponsored research on COVID-19 and other left-out areas that need to be taken up and thus may help in policy formulation. It further highlights the impact of prolific funding agencies so that efforts may be initiated to increase the impact and thereby the returns of investment. The study can help to map the scientific structure of COVID-19 through the lens of funded research and recognize core inclinations of its development. Overall, a comprehensive analysis has been performed to present the detailed characteristics of sponsored research on emerging area of COVID-19, and it is informative, useful and one of its kind on the theme.

Originality/value

The study explores the funding support of research on COVID-19 and its other aspects, along with the mode of availability.

Mapping research on COVID-19 in Argentina: bibliometric analysis 6 months after the first reported case

Introduction

The COVID-19 outbreak has caused a major threat to the international community and raised significant public health concerns. The objective of this work was to describe the scientific communication patterns of Argentina on COVID-19 in the Scopus database.

Method

A bibliometric study was carried out. Articles were retrieved according to subject matter using the title, abstract and keywords fields in the Scopus database.

Results

229 documents were retrieved, where 69.9% were citable documents (51.5% originals), 76.4% in English. The scientific leadership of Argentina in the published documents was 44.1%. National collaboration was found in 38% of the documents, in 16.6% collaboration between institutions from different jurisdictions, and 59.8% international collaboration.

Conclusions

The productivity and internationalization indicators found in this study represent the response of the Argentine scientific community in the initial phase from the sphere of knowledge production. The results obtained could be interpreted as an effective response to the unprecedented health and social crisis imposed by COVID-19.

A Global Overview of COVID-19 Research in the Pediatric Field: Bibliometric Review

BACKGROUND

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a great number of papers have been published in the pediatric field.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess research around the globe on COVID-19 in the pediatric field by bibliometric analysis, identifying publication trends and topic dissemination and showing the relevance of publishing authors, institutions, and countries.

METHODS

The Scopus database was comprehensively searched for all indexed documents published between January 1, 2020, and June 11, 2020, dealing with COVID-19 in the pediatric population (0-18 years). A machine learning bibliometric methodology was applied to evaluate the total number of papers and citations, journal and publication types, the top productive institutions and countries and their scientific collaboration, and core keywords.

RESULTS

A total of 2301 papers were retrieved, with an average of 4.8 citations per article. Of this, 1078 (46.9%) were research articles, 436 (18.9%) were reviews, 363 (15.8%) were letters, 186 (8.1%) were editorials, 7 (0.3%) were conference papers, and 231 (10%) were categorized as others. The studies were published in 969 different journals, headed by The Lancet. The retrieved papers were published by a total of 12,657 authors from 114 countries. The most productive countries were the United States, China, and Italy. The four main clusters of keywords were pathogenesis and clinical characteristics (keyword occurrences: n=2240), public health issues (n=352), mental health (n=82), and therapeutic aspects (n=70).

CONCLUSIONS

In the pediatric field, a large number of articles were published within a limited period on COVID-19, testifying to the rush to spread new findings on the topic in a timely manner. The leading authors, countries, and institutions evidently belonged to the most impacted geographical areas. A focus on the pediatric population was often included in general articles, and pediatric research about COVID-19 mainly focused on the clinical features, public health issues, and psychological impact of the disease.

COVID-19 Publications in Family Medicine Journals in 2020: A PubMed-Based Bibliometric Analysis

Family medicine physicians have been on the front lines of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, research and publications in family medicine journals are rarely discussed. In this study, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on COVID-19-related articles published in PubMed-indexed English language family medicine journals in 2020, which recorded the publication date and author’s country and collected citations from Google Scholar. Additionally, we used LitCovid (an open database of COVID-19 literature from PubMed) to determine the content categories of each article and total number of global publications. We found that 33 family medicine journals published 5107 articles in 2020, of which 409 (8.0%) were COVID-19-related articles. Among the article categories, 107 were original articles, accounting for only 26.2% of the articles. In terms of content, the main category was prevention, with 177 articles, accounting for 43.3% of the articles. At the beginning of the epidemic, 10 articles were published in family medicine journals in January 2020, accounting for 11% of all COVID-19-related articles worldwide; however, this accounted for <0.5% of all disciplinary studies in the entire year. Therefore, family medicine journals indeed play a sentinel role, and the intensities and timeliness of COVID-19 publications deserve further investigation.

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 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.

Publication patterns' changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal and short-term scientometric analysis

In recent months the COVID-19 (also known as SARS-CoV-2 and Coronavirus) pandemic has spread throughout the world. In parallel, extensive scholarly research regarding various aspects of the pandemic has been published. In this work, we analyse the changes in biomedical publishing patterns due to the pandemic. We study the changes in the volume of publications in both peer reviewed journals and preprint servers, average time to acceptance of papers submitted to biomedical journals, international (co-)authorship of these papers (expressed by diversity and volume), and the possible association between journal metrics and said changes. We study these possible changes using two approaches: a short-term analysis through which changes during the first six months of the outbreak are examined for both COVID-19 related papers and non-COVID-19 related papers; and a longitudinal approach through which changes are examined in comparison to the previous four years. Our results show that the pandemic has so far had a tremendous effect on all examined accounts of scholarly publications: A sharp increase in publication volume has been witnessed and it can be almost entirely attributed to the pandemic; a significantly faster mean time to acceptance for COVID-19 papers is apparent, and it has (partially) come at the expense of non-COVID-19 papers; and a significant reduction in international collaboration for COVID-19 papers has also been identified. As the pandemic continues to spread, these changes may cause a slow down in research in non-COVID-19 biomedical fields and bring about a lower rate of international collaboration.

A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Literature on the Early Phase of COVID-19 in Italy

Background: Studying the scientific literature about COVID-19 and Italy, one of the first countries to be hit by the pandemic, allows an investigation into how knowledge develops during a public health emergency.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify articles published on the topic between January and April 2020. Articles were classified according to type of study. Co-occurrence of terms, and geographic and temporal trends were analyzed.

Results: Of the 238 articles included in the systematic review, the majority (37%) focused on hospital and clinical management of COVID-19, while 23.9% were commentaries. Epidemiological studies constituted 45.5% of the articles published by authors with non-Italian affiliations.

Conclusion: The scientific articles on COVID-19 in Italy were varied in type of study, though with limited international impact. The lockdown and the pressure placed on hospitals during the first wave of the pandemic mainly resulted in publications on disease management and commentaries.

Mapping the intellectual structure of the coronavirus field (2000-2020): a co-word analysis

Over the two last decades, coronaviruses have affected human life in different ways, especially in terms of health and economy. Due to the profound effects of novel coronaviruses, growing tides of research are emerging in various research fields. This paper employs a co-word analysis approach to map the intellectual structure of the coronavirus literature for a better understanding of how coronavirus research and the disease itself have developed during the target timeframe. A strategic diagram has been drawn to depict the coronavirus domain's structure and development. A detailed picture of coronavirus literature has been extracted from a huge number of papers to provide a quick overview of the coronavirus literature. The main themes of past coronavirus-related publications are (a) "Antibody-Virus Interactions," (b) "Emerging Infectious Diseases," (c) "Protein Structure-based Drug Design and Antiviral Drug Discovery," (d) "Coronavirus Detection Methods," (e) "Viral Pathogenesis and Immunity," and (f) "Animal Coronaviruses." The emerging infectious diseases are mostly related to fatal diseases (such as Middle East respiratory syndrome, severe acute respiratory syndrome, and COVID-19) and animal coronaviruses (including porcine, turkey, feline, canine, equine, and bovine coronaviruses and infectious bronchitis virus), which are capable of placing animal-dependent industries such as the swine and poultry industries under strong economic pressure. Although considerable research into coronavirus has been done, this unique field has not yet matured sufficiently. Therefore, "Antibody-virus Interactions," "Emerging Infectious Diseases," and "Coronavirus Detection Methods" hold interesting, promising research gaps to be both explored and filled in the future.

Scientometric analyzing the output of researchers and organizations on COVID-19 for better conducting the scientific efforts: with a glance to endocrinology

Purpose

As COVID-19 spreads rapidly and could affect the people and also lead to their death, especially individuals with underlying diseases, such as diabetes, the research community is also active in publishing novel research about it. Analyzing scientific outputs in this topic can represent an overview of publications. For this purpose, this study was conducted to determine status of publishing research works related to COVID-19 and analyzing the all documents published and indexed in Web of Science database and illustrate the co-occurrence and co-authority of hot papers in this documents.

Methodology

Our search strategy was based on using the related key terms including COVID-19, coronavirus, SARS2, etc., to find out all the published scientific works related to coronavirus disease indexed in web of science (WoS) in 2020. We then extracted the all hot papers and especially hot papers in endocrinology category and analyzed them. The data saved and imported in VOSviewer and ScientoPy programs for analysis and illustration of our data. We have shown our analysis in the tables, figures and maps.

Results

Totally, 56,402 records and 309 hot papers were retrieved. 3 of these hot papers were in endocrinology category. The most common type of publication was original papers followed by editorial papers in the second rank. The country with the most published documents was the USA followed by China. The journals of "British Medical Journal" and "Journal of Medical Virology" were ranked as the first and second sources, respectively. The "Harvard University" was the top organization with high proportion of scientific publications and "the Lancet" was the top-ranked journal that published highly-cited papers.

Conclusion

The literature on COVID-19 is increasing with a high and fast growth. In this regard, there is a need to evaluate these publications once in a while and their results should be published to use this information for more effective management of future research works with emphasizes on the gaps of researches and more citable documents and allocation of budgets on more needed research and don't carry out the duplicates research. This would be helpful for prevention, control, and treatment of COVID-19 that is now among the most common topics in the world.

Is rapid scientific publication also high quality? Bibliometric analysis of highly disseminated COVID-19 research papers

The impact of COVID-19 has underlined the need for reliable information to guide clinical practice and policy. This urgency has to be balanced against disruption to journal handling capacity and the continued need to ensure scientific rigour. We examined the reporting quality of highly disseminated COVID-19 research papers using a bibliometric analysis examining reporting quality and risk of bias (RoB) amongst 250 top scoring Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) COVID-19 research papers between January and April 2020. Method-specific RoB tools were used to assess quality. After exclusions, 84 studies from 44 journals were included. Forty-three (51%) were case series/studies, and only one was an randomized controlled trial. Most authors were from institutions based in China (n = 44, 52%). The median AAS and impact factor was 2015 (interquartile range [IQR] 1,105-4,051.5) and 12.8 (IQR 5-44.2) respectively. Nine studies (11%) utilized a formal reporting framework, 62 (74%) included a funding statement, and 41 (49%) were at high RoB. This review of the most widely disseminated COVID-19 studies highlights a preponderance of low-quality case series with few research papers adhering to good standards of reporting. It emphasizes the need for cautious interpretation of research and the increasingly vital responsibility that journals have in ensuring high-quality publications.

A bibliometric analysis of the dental scientific literature on COVID-19

Objectives

The rapid production of a large volume of literature during the early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak created a substantial burden for clinicians and scientists. Therefore, this manuscript aims to identify and describe the scientific literature addressing COVID-19 from a dental research perspective, in terms of the manuscript origin, research domain, study type, and level of evidence (LoE).

Materials and methods

Data were retrieved from Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed. A descriptive analysis of bibliographic data, collaboration network, and keyword co-occurrence analysis were performed. Articles were further classified according to the field of interest, main research question, type of study, and LoE.

Results

The present study identified 296 dental scientific COVID-19 original papers, published in 89 journals, and co-authored by 1331 individuals affiliated with 429 institutions from 53 countries. Although 81.4% were single-country papers, extensive collaboration among the institutions of single countries (Italian, British, and Brazilian institutions) was observed. The main research areas were as follows: the potential use of saliva and other oral fluids as promising samples for COVID-19 testing, dental education, and guidelines for the prevention of COVID-19 transmission in dental practice. The majority of articles were narrative reviews, cross-sectional studies, and short communications. The overall LoE in the analyzed dental literature was low, with only two systematic reviews with the highest LoE I.

Conclusion

The dental literature on the COVID-19 pandemic does not provide data relevant to the evidence-based decision-making process. Future studies with a high LoE are essential to gain precise knowledge on COVID-19 infection within the various fields of Dentistry.

Clinical relevance

The published dental literature on COVID-19 consists principally of articles with a low level of scientific evidence which do not provide sufficient reliable high-quality evidence that is essential for decision making in clinical dental practice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00784-021-03916-6.

COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a scoping review of the meta-analyses published regarding about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evaluating their main characteristics, publication trends and methodological quality.

METHODS

A bibliometric search was performed in PubMed®, Scopus and Web of Science, focusing on meta-analyses about COVID-2019 disease. Bibliometric and descriptive data for the included articles were extracted and the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses was evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

A total of 348 meta-analyses were considered eligible. The first meta-analysis about COVID-19 disease was published on February 26, 2020, and the number of meta-analyses has grown rapidly since then. Most of them were published in infectious disease and virology journals. The greatest number come from China, followed by the United States, Italy and the United Kingdom. On average, these meta-analyses included 23 studies and 15,200 participants. Overall quality was remarkably low, and only 8.9% of them could be considered as of high confidence level.

CONCLUSION

Although well-designed meta-analyses about COVID-19 disease have already been published, the majority are of low quality. Thus, all stakeholders playing a role in COVID-19 deseases, including policy makers, researchers, publishers and journals, should prioritize well-designed meta-analyses, performed only when the background information seem suitable, and discouraging those of low quality or that use suboptimal methods.

A Comprehensive Overview of the COVID-19 Literature: Machine Learning-Based Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Shortly after the emergence of COVID-19, researchers rapidly mobilized to study numerous aspects of the disease such as its evolution, clinical manifestations, effects, treatments, and vaccinations. This led to a rapid increase in the number of COVID-19-related publications. Identifying trends and areas of interest using traditional review methods (eg, scoping and systematic reviews) for such a large domain area is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct an extensive bibliometric analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of the COVID-19 literature.

METHODS

We used the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) that consists of a large number of research articles related to all coronaviruses. We used a machine learning-based method to analyze the most relevant COVID-19-related articles and extracted the most prominent topics. Specifically, we used a clustering algorithm to group published articles based on the similarity of their abstracts to identify research hotspots and current research directions. We have made our software accessible to the community via GitHub.

RESULTS

Of the 196,630 publications retrieved from the database, we included 28,904 in our analysis. The mean number of weekly publications was 990 (SD 789.3). The country that published the highest number of COVID-19-related articles was China (2950/17,270, 17.08%). The highest number of articles were published in bioRxiv. Lei Liu affiliated with the Southern University of Science and Technology in China published the highest number of articles (n=46). Based on titles and abstracts alone, we were able to identify 1515 surveys, 733 systematic reviews, 512 cohort studies, 480 meta-analyses, and 362 randomized control trials. We identified 19 different topics covered among the publications reviewed. The most dominant topic was public health response, followed by clinical care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, clinical characteristics and risk factors, and epidemic models for its spread.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide an overview of the COVID-19 literature and have identified current hotspots and research directions. Our findings can be useful for the research community to help prioritize research needs and recognize leading COVID-19 researchers, institutes, countries, and publishers. Our study shows that an AI-based bibliometric analysis has the potential to rapidly explore a large corpus of academic publications during a public health crisis. We believe that this work can be used to analyze other eHealth-related literature to help clinicians, administrators, and policy makers to obtain a holistic view of the literature and be able to categorize different topics of the existing research for further analyses. It can be further scaled (for instance, in time) to clinical summary documentation. Publishers should avoid noise in the data by developing a way to trace the evolution of individual publications and unique authors.

Visualizing the knowledge outburst in global research on COVID-19

The scholarly output of the new coronavirus research has been proliferating. During five months, an amount of 14,588 scientific publications about nCoV-2 and COVID-19 has been generated intensively (as indexed in Scopus on 31 May 2020). Such a knowledge outburst has created ample interest in understanding the research landscape of this newly configured area. This paper demonstrates on scientometric dimensions of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) research using quantifiable characteristics of the publication dataset. Findings reveal that the rate of publication growth (1600%) is very significant to a synergic response of the researchers to combat with the most extended sequence of an RNA virus. Indeed their response has geared up to an average of 100 articles per day. Many scholarly publishers have disclosed their preprint servers to make the publications available immediately, even by enabling Open Access. The scientific contents have published in more than 500 journals from 240 academic publishers. While the top-ten publishers occupied almost 70% of the articles, then about 25% of the studies were sponsored by 300 funding agencies. Among the notable journals Lancet, Nature, BMJ, JAMA, JMV, and NEJM are prominent. Findings also reveal that majority of the contributions have occurred in Medical Science, focusing on virology, immunology, epidemiology, pharmacology, public health, critical care, and emergency medicine. However, the closely associated terms are virus transmission, infection control, asymptomatic, quarantine, pneumonia, human, disease severity, clinical trials, viral pathogenesis, pandemic, risk, and mortality. The study suggests that academic hubs are located mostly in the USA, China, Italy, and the UK. Among the productive institutions; Huazhong Univ (China), Tongji Med. College (China), Harvard Med. School (USA), Univ of Milan (Italy), INSERM (France), UCL (UK) are outstanding. The G7 countries together produced 50% of the global research output on nCov-2. It also noted an encouraging trend of collaborative research across many countries and disciplines, where the values of CI (6.46), DC (0.79), and CC (0.59) are very significant. It examines the geographical diversity of the collaborating authors, thereby visualized their linkages via co-authorship occurrences. Finally, it analyzed the publications' impact to showcase the most influential contributions of the new coronavirus research.

Iranian researchers' contributions to research on COVID-19: A bibliometric analysis and visualization

Background: COVID-19 pandemic crisis motivated researchers worldwide to deeply investigate it from different perspectives. As Iran is one of the highly-affected countries by Covid-19, Iranian researchers have focused on studying it. This study aimed at analyzing and visualizing Iranian researchers' papers on COVID-19 from a bibliometric perspective. Methods: By searching MeSH-selected keywords related to COVID-19 in Scopus, Iranian researchers' papers on COVID-19 were extracted in a CSV format and underwent bibliometric techniques, such as coauthorship analysis, citation, and co-citation analysis, keyword and term co-occurrence mapping and etc. in the Microsoft Excel and VOSviewer software package. Results: A total of 405 papers were authored by Iranian researchers on COVID-19 during the study period, with the average number of citations per paper of 2.60 and a mean h-index of 15. The majority of papers were original articles in English. Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases and Archives of Iranian Medicine and Medical Hypotheses were highly ranked publishing journals, respectively. The most productive institute and author were Tehran University of Medical Sciences with 119 papers and Rezaei, N. with 12 papers. Iranian researchers collaborated with the researchers of 73 countries, with the USA ranking first in Covid-19 research, followed by Italy, Canada, and United Kingdom. In publishing papers on COVID-19, Iran ranked first among the Middle Eastern countries and thirteenth internationally. Conclusion: Iranian researchers were active in 5 main areas of COVID-19 research, including epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, virology, and systematic review.

A Bibliometric Network Analysis of Coronavirus during the First Eight Months of COVID-19 in 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all aspects of society. Researchers worldwide have been working to provide new solutions to and better understanding of this coronavirus. In this research, our goal was to perform a Bibliometric Network Analysis (BNA) to investigate the strategic themes, thematic evolution structure and trends of coronavirus during the first eight months of COVID-19 in the Web of Science (WoS) database in 2020. To do this, 14,802 articles were analyzed, with the support of the SciMAT software. This analysis highlights 24 themes, of which 11 of the more important ones were discussed in-depth. The thematic evolution structure shows how the themes are evolving over time, and the most developed and future trends of coronavirus with focus on COVID-19 were visually depicted. The results of the strategic diagram highlight 'CHLOROQUINE', 'ANXIETY', 'PREGNANCY' and 'ACUTE-RESPIRATORY-SYNDROME', among others, as the clusters with the highest number of associated citations. The thematic evolution. structure presented two thematic areas: "Damage prevention and containment of COVID-19" and "Comorbidities and diseases caused by COVID-19", which provides new perspectives and futures trends of the field. These results will form the basis for future research and guide decision-making in coronavirus focused on COVID-19 research and treatments.

Bibliometric analysis of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) literature published in Web of Science 2019-2020

Coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China, turned into a pandemic in record time. Communication of disease presentation and mechanism of spread remain keys to getting ahead of the virus and limiting its spread beyond the capacity of management. Owing to huge academic focus and pandemic concern around the globe, this bibliometric analysis investigated research productivity related to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic using the Web of Science database. The relevant data were harvested, and search query was further refined by publication years (2020 OR 2019) and document types (article, book chapter, and proceedings paper). Finally, 6694 records were imported and downloaded in Plaintext and BibTeX formats on August 1, 2020. The data analysis was performed using MS Excel, VOS viewer, and Biblioshiny software. Of the 6694 publications that appeared in that period, the USA and Chinese research institutions topped the numbers. At the same time, the Journal of Medical Virology and CUREUS (Cureus Journal of Medical Science), remained favorite journals for publications. The pattern of multi-author publications has outstripped that of single-authors. Apart from COVID-19 and the novel coronavirus, the important keywords mentioned included pandemic, pneumonia, epidemiology, public health, outbreak, epidemic, China, infection, and treatment. The analysis shows a strong local research response from China, with large teams reporting on the disease outbreak. Subsequent studies will document a global response as the virus spreads worldwide. The initial research related to the current coronavirus outbreak was reported from within China. The data and patterns were supposed to alter as the virus spread globally.

Genetic analysis of the 2019 coronavirus pandemic with from real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction

Corona viruses (CoV) are known to cause extreme pandemics in the globe. The year 2020 will be a pandemic with the spread of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) across the globe. Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has been a part of our scary life for more than a quarter of a year in 2020. The Wuhan market and China have been the most commonly used terms in the world for at least a quarter of 2020. A zoonotic coronavirus has entered organisms to affect organisms for the third season in several centuries. CoV is a global pandemic prompted a drastic and rapid reconfiguration of society. CoV have extraordinary broad genomes of about 30 kilobases of RNA. There is no genetic relationship between the SARS-CoV, MERS and SARS-CoV-2. For health care strategies and for anticipating and preventing potential outbreaks, adequate description of the international spread of COVID-19 virus is imperative. The WHO has declared COVID-19 as endemic to pandemic in the first trimester of 2020. The biggest issues for diagnosis COVID-19 is not established apart from Real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). In order to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic, testing of active SARS-CoV-2 infections is a fundamental public health method. The vast use of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests around the world has led to increased availability of test kits, which is also a major bottleneck. The technique RT-PCR was generally agreed in the present scenario to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the human body. This review discusses about the importance of molecular technique for diagnosing the pandemic disease of 2019. In conclusion, RT-PCR was found to be an apt technique for identification of SARS-CoV-2.

Coronavirus disease-19 in environmental fields: a bibliometric and visualization mapping analysis

A coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus has appeared in China by the end of 2019 and later recognized as a global pandemic. This pandemic has evolved as a global public health menace. It has affected every aspect of human life. In line with these concerns, governments and the scientific community react promptly to the outbreak of this pandemic. These efforts are devoted to develop vaccine and curative medicines. Further efforts are dedicated to assessing the impacts of the pandemic in relation to socioeconomic, psychological, and environmental dimensions. In this regard, it is important to follow up developments and research activities on this global issue. The present work intended to tracking the current hotspots and research trends on COVID-19 in environmental fields. Bibliometric analysis and visualization mapping were utilized with the objective of revealing and evaluating the developments in knowledge on COVID-2019 and its impacts based on a collection of environmental sources. A sum of 729 documents were collected from Scopus database limiting to environmental sources only. Of all these publications, 563 (77.2%) were articles, 56 (7.7%) were reviews, and 110 (15.0%) were others. China has the highest share of publications (163; 22.4%). It is followed by the USA (139; 19.15), and Italy (110; 15.1%). Most publications on COVID-19 were in prestigious journals. The most productive institution at global level was Chinese Academy of Sciences, China (24 documents; 3.3%). The most prevalent topics are in relation to impacts of the pandemic on air quality, mental health, psychological, and economic aspects. The development of these topics is based on cross-sectional studies, evidence-based tools, remote sensing, satellite mapping, geographic information systems, market analysis and sampling. The progress of environmental research on COVID-19 will guide the development of global environmental strategies to control future global environmental risks.

Obstacles and Considerations Related to Clinical Trial Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic from the research and science community has been vigorous, with information being released faster than that of any other event in human history. Articles related to the virus were being rapidly published by January 2020. A small fraction of these publications comprised reports of prospective clinical trials (0.25%), and many of these trials have imparted conflicting conclusions, leading to confusion among the public and the scientific community. Additionally, the pandemic has raised many serious scientific and ethical concerns related to clinical research. In this review, we divided the conduct of clinical research trials into three steps and critically reviewed each step, along with the challenges and obstacles arising amid the ongoing crisis. The clinical research steps we reviewed include (1) clinical trial design factors such as social and scientific value, feasibility, single vs. multicenter trials, randomization, control groups, endpoints, off-label and compassionate use of medications, data analysis, and verifying the integrity of data; (2) ethical issues such as committee approvals, efficiency, virtual visits and remote monitoring, informed consent, shipping investigational products, and external monitoring and audits; and (3) publication and sharing of preprints, press releases, social media, and misinformation. The COVID-19 pandemic is adversely affecting existing clinical trials for other ailments and diseases, including cancer, with most trials being delayed or deferred. Although urgency is needed to communicate effective treatment and prevention strategies for COVID-19, research efforts should maintain the same high-quality core ethical principles that governed human subject research before the pandemic. Despite the catastrophic devastation caused by the pandemic, the adoption of more flexible, cost-effective methods of conducting clinical trials (without compromising ethical conduct, safety, or data integrity, while maintaining research efficiency) represents a potential silver lining. Streamlining clinical research will help to congruently address other important health issues, despite the ongoing COVID-19 crisis.

A Bibliometric Analysis of COVID-19 across Science and Social Science Research Landscape

The lack of knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic has encouraged extensive research in the academic sphere, reflected in the exponentially growing scientific literature. While the state of COVID-19 research reveals it is currently in an early stage of developing knowledge, a comprehensive and in-depth overview is still missing. Accordingly, the paper’s main aim is to provide an extensive bibliometric analysis of COVID-19 research across the science and social science research landscape, using innovative bibliometric approaches (e.g., Venn diagram, Biblioshiny descriptive statistics, VOSviewer co-occurrence network analysis, Jaccard distance cluster analysis, text mining based on binary logistic regression). The bibliometric analysis considers the Scopus database, including all relevant information on COVID-19 related publications (n = 16,866) available in the first half of 2020. The empirical results indicate the domination of health sciences in terms of number of relevant publications and total citations, while physical sciences and social sciences and humanities lag behind significantly. Nevertheless, there is an evidence of COVID-19 research collaboration within and between different subject area classifications with a gradual increase in importance of non-health scientific disciplines. The findings emphasize the great need for a comprehensive and in-depth approach that considers various scientific disciplines in COVID-19 research so as to benefit not only the scientific community but evidence-based policymaking as part of efforts to properly respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bibliometric evaluation of Latin American contributions on COVID-19

Introducción.

La propagación de la COVID-19, una enfermedad infecciosa causada por el nuevo coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, se ha convertido en una pandemia que, a la par de su rápida diseminación a nivel mundial, ha traído consigo un aumento exponencial de la cantidad de estudios relacionados con el tema, fenómeno en el que los investigadores de Latinoamérica han participado activamente.

Objetivo.

Llevar a cabo un estudio bibliométrico descriptivo para identificar las tendencias de la investigación sobre COVID-19 producida en Latinoamérica.

Materiales y métodos.

Se recurrió a las bases de datos Web of Science, Scopus y Pubmed para recuperar la producción científica latinoamericana sobre COVID-19. Se analizaron los indicadores bibliométricos de producción, visibilidad, impacto y colaboración para evaluar la participación regional en la investigación sobre el tema.

Resultados.

El análisis de 142 documentos evidenció un crecimiento exponencial de la producción científica en el corto periodo analizado, una significativa colaboración internacional (51,4 %), y el liderazgo de las instituciones regionales (71 %) en la investigación con aportes en revistas de alta visibilidad, especialmente de Colombia, Brasil y México.

Conclusiones.

El estudio evidenció resultados relevantes sobre la participación regional en la investigación sobre COVID-19, no solo en cuanto a la cantidad y el crecimiento exponencial, sino también a su calidad y excelencia, con una elevada tasa de colaboración internacional y de publicación en revistas de reconocido prestigio, lo que, además de ser clave para la visibilidad de los países, es un considerable aporte a las investigaciones que se realizan en otros contextos geográficos.

Citation Network Analysis of the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Background: The first outbreaks of the new coronavirus disease, named COVID-19, occurred at the end of December 2019. This disease spread quickly around the world, with the United States, Brazil and Mexico being the countries the most severely affected. This study aims to analyze the relationship between different publications and their authors through citation networks, as well as to identify the research areas and determine which publication has been the most cited. Methods: The search for publications was carried out through the Web of Science database using terms such as “COVID-19” and “SARS-CoV-2” for the period between January and July 2020. The Citation Network Explorer software was used for publication analysis. Results: A total of 14,335 publications were found with 42,374 citations generated in the network, with June being the month with the largest number of publications. The most cited publication was “Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China” by Guan et al., published in April 2020. Nine groups comprising different research areas in this field, including clinical course, psychology, treatment and epidemiology, were found using the clustering functionality. Conclusions: The citation network offers an objective and comprehensive analysis of the main papers on COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2.

Indian Publications on SARS-CoV-2: A bibliometric study of WHO COVID-19 database

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nowadays, the whole World is under threat of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many fatalities and forced scientific communities to foster their Research and Development (R&D) activities. As a result, there is an enormous growth of scholarly literature on the subject. We here in this study have assessed the Indian publications contributions on COVID-19.

METHODS

WHO is curating global scientific literature on coronavirus since it declared COVID-19 a global pandemic through Global Research Database on COVID-19. The present study analyzed Indian publications on SARS-CoV-2 as found in WHO COVID-19 database. The research data was restricted for the period of March 2, 2020 to May 12, 2020.

RESULTS

The study found that there is a considerable and constant growth of Indian publications on COVID-19 from mid-April. It is interesting to note that, the most prolific authors belong to either AIIMS or ICMR institutes. Delhi state contributed highest number of publications on COVID-19. The AIIMS, New Delhi was the most productive institution in terms of publications. The Indian Journal of Medical Research has emerged as the productive journal contributing highest number of the publications. In terms of research area, the majority of the publications were related to Epidemiology.

CONCLUSIONS

The highly cited publications were of evidenced based studies. It is observed that the studies pertaining to virology, diagnosis and treatment, clinical features etc. have received highest citations than general studies on epidemiology or pandemic.

A Comprehensive Overview of the COVID-19 Literature: Machine Learning–Based Bibliometric Analysis (Preprint).. [DOI: 10.2196/preprints.23703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

BACKGROUND

Shortly after the emergence of COVID-19, researchers rapidly mobilized to study numerous aspects of the disease such as its evolution, clinical manifestations, effects, treatments, and vaccinations. This led to a rapid increase in the number of COVID-19–related publications. Identifying trends and areas of interest using traditional review methods (eg, scoping and systematic reviews) for such a large domain area is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct an extensive bibliometric analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of the COVID-19 literature.

METHODS

We used the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) that consists of a large number of research articles related to all coronaviruses. We used a machine learning–based method to analyze the most relevant COVID-19–related articles and extracted the most prominent topics. Specifically, we used a clustering algorithm to group published articles based on the similarity of their abstracts to identify research hotspots and current research directions. We have made our software accessible to the community via GitHub.

RESULTS

Of the 196,630 publications retrieved from the database, we included 28,904 in our analysis. The mean number of weekly publications was 990 (SD 789.3). The country that published the highest number of COVID-19–related articles was China (2950/17,270, 17.08%). The highest number of articles were published in bioRxiv. Lei Liu affiliated with the Southern University of Science and Technology in China published the highest number of articles (n=46). Based on titles and abstracts alone, we were able to identify 1515 surveys, 733 systematic reviews, 512 cohort studies, 480 meta-analyses, and 362 randomized control trials. We identified 19 different topics covered among the publications reviewed. The most dominant topic was public health response, followed by clinical care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, clinical characteristics and risk factors, and epidemic models for its spread.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide an overview of the COVID-19 literature and have identified current hotspots and research directions. Our findings can be useful for the research community to help prioritize research needs and recognize leading COVID-19 researchers, institutes, countries, and publishers. Our study shows that an AI-based bibliometric analysis has the potential to rapidly explore a large corpus of academic publications during a public health crisis. We believe that this work can be used to analyze other eHealth-related literature to help clinicians, administrators, and policy makers to obtain a holistic view of the literature and be able to categorize different topics of the existing research for further analyses. It can be further scaled (for instance, in time) to clinical summary documentation. Publishers should avoid noise in the data by developing a way to trace the evolution of individual publications and unique authors.

The Prediction of Infectious Diseases: A Bibliometric Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The outbreak of infectious diseases has a negative influence on public health and the economy. The prediction of infectious diseases can effectively control large-scale outbreaks and reduce transmission of epidemics in rapid response to serious public health events. Therefore, experts and scholars are increasingly concerned with the prediction of infectious diseases. However, a knowledge mapping analysis of literature regarding the prediction of infectious diseases using rigorous bibliometric tools, which are supposed to offer further knowledge structure and distribution, has been conducted infrequently. Therefore, we implement a bibliometric analysis about the prediction of infectious diseases to objectively analyze the current status and research hotspots, in order to provide a reference for related researchers.

METHODS

We viewed "infectious disease*" and "prediction" or "forecasting" as search theme in the core collection of Web of Science from inception to 1 May 2020. We used two effective bibliometric tools, i.e., CiteSpace (Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA) and VOSviewer (Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands) to objectively analyze the data of the prediction of infectious disease domain based on related publications, which can be downloaded from the core collection of Web of Science. Then, the leading publications of the prediction of infectious diseases were identified to detect the historical progress based on collaboration analysis, co-citation analysis, and co-occurrence analysis.

RESULTS

1880 documents that met the inclusion criteria were extracted from Web of Science in this study. The number of documents exhibited a growing trend, which can be expressed an increasing number of experts and scholars paying attention to the field year by year. These publications were published in 427 different journals with 11 different document types, and the most frequently studied types were articles 1618 (83%). In addition, as the most productive country, the United States has provided a lot of scientific research achievements in the field of infectious diseases.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides a systematic and objective view of the field, which can be useful for readers to evaluate the characteristics of publications involving the prediction of infectious diseases and for policymakers to take timely scientific responses.

COVID-19: A scholarly production dataset report for research analysis

COVID-2019 has been recognized as a global threat, and several studies are being conducted in order to contribute to the fight and prevention of this pandemic. This work presents a scholarly production dataset focused on COVID-19, providing an overview of scientific research activities, making it possible to identify countries, scientists and research groups most active in this task force to combat the coronavirus disease. The dataset is composed of 40,212 records of articles' metadata collected from Scopus, PubMed, arXiv and bioRxiv databases from January 2019 to July 2020. Those data were extracted by using the techniques of Python Web Scraping and preprocessed with Pandas Data Wrangling. In addition, the pipeline to preprocess and generate the dataset are versioned with the Data Version Control tool (DVC) and are thus easily reproducible and auditable.

Contribution of Iran in COVID-19 studies: a bibliometrics analysis

Background

Iran is fighting heroically against COVID-19. Due to the importance of scientific publications in better dealing with this stubborn virus, this study was conducted aiming at reviewing COVID-19 publications by Iranian scientists.

Methods

We searched for COVID-19 and all its related keywords in the Web of Science (WOS), Scopus and PubMed databases to find documents published by Iranian authors until July 10, 2020. Duplicates documents were excluded, and bibliographic parameters were evaluated. Co-authorship matrix was calculated using Bibexcel, and visualizations were done using VOSviewer.

Results

A total of 849 documents from 3450 Iranian researchers (5.5 authors per document) were retrieved from WOS, PubMed, and Scopus and Iran ranked 12th and 13th in WOS and Scopus in terms of the number of publications. The average citation per document was 2.2 with the h-index of 18. Original articles and letters were the most common formats for Iranian publications. The Journal of Military Medicine has published the highest number of documents. Iranian authors have mostly collaborated with researchers from the United States, Italy, the UK, and Canada, respectively. The co-occurrence network for keywords represented five publication clusters in the collection, and the largest clusters were related to epidemiological studies and public health, followed by clinical studies on COVID-19.

Conclusion

Iranian researchers have had a significant scientific contribution in various areas of the disease. However, the network of studies has not been sufficiently cohesive, and more coherent collaboration between researchers at the national and international levels should be on the agenda of research policymakers in the country.

Bibliometric Analysis on COVID-19: A Comparison of Research Between English and Chinese Studies

Background: As an emerging infectious disease, COVID-19 has garnered great research interest. We aimed to explore the differences between English language and Chinese language Medical/Scientific journals publications, particularly aiming to explore the efficacy/contents of the literature published in English and Chinese in relation to the outcomes of management and characterization of COVID-19 during the early stage of COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: Publications on COVID-19 research were retrieved from both English and Chinese databases. Bibliometric analyses were performed using VOSviewer 1.6.14, and CiteSpace V software. Network maps were generated to evaluate the collaborations between different authors, countries/provinces, and institutions.

Results: A total of 143 English and 721 Chinese original research articles and reviews on COVID-19 were included in our study. Most of the authors and institutions of the papers were from China before March 1st, 2020, however, the distribution of authors and institutions were mainly in developed countries or more wealthy areas of China. The range of the keywords in English publications was more extensive than those in Chinese. Traditional Chinese Medicine was seen more frequently in Chinese papers than in English. Of the 143 articles published in English, 54 articles were published by Chinese authors only and 21 articles were published jointly by Chinese and other overseas authors.

Conclusions: The publications in English have enabled medical practitioners and scientists to share/exchange information, while on the other hand, the publications in the Chinese language have provided complementary educational approaches for the local medical practitioners to understand the essential and key information to manage COVID-19 in the relatively remote regions of China, for the general population with a general level of education.

Mapping the situation of research on coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19): a preliminary bibliometric analysis during the early stage of the outbreak

BACKGROUND

The novel coronavirus, named as 2019-nCoV or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has recently appeared in China and has spread worldwide, presenting a health threat to the global community. Therefore, it is important to understand the global scientific output of COVID-19 research during the early stage of the outbreak. Thus, to track the current hotspots, and highlight future directions, we performed a bibliometric analysis to obtain an approximate scenario of COVID-19 to date.

METHODS

Relevant studies to COVID-19 were obtained from the Scopus database during the early stage of the outbreak. We then analysed the data by using well-established bibliometric indices: document type, country, collaboration patterns, affiliation, journal name, and citation patterns. VOSviewer was applied to map and determine hot topics in this field.

RESULTS

The bibliometric analysis indicated that there were 19,044 publications on Scopus published on COVID-19 during the early stage of the outbreak (December 2019 up until June 19, 2020). Of all these publications, 9140 (48.0%) were articles; 4192 (22.0%) were letters; 1797 (9.4%) were reviews; 1754 (9.2%) were editorials; 1728 (9.1%) were notes; and 433 (2.3%) were others. The USA published the largest number of publications on COVID-19 (4479; 23.4%), followed by China (3310; 17.4%), Italy, (2314; 12.2%), and the UK (1981; 10.4%). British Medical Journal was the most productive. The Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Tongji Medical, and Harvard Medical School were the institutions that published the largest number of COVID-19 research. The most prevalent topics of research in COVID-19 include "clinical features studies", "pathological findings and therapeutic design", "care facilities preparation and infection control", and "maternal, perinatal and neonatal outcomes".

CONCLUSIONS

This bibliometric study may reflect rapidly emerging topics on COVID-19 research, where substantial research activity has already begun extensively during the early stage of the outbreak. The findings reported here shed new light on the major progress in the near future for hot topics on COVID-19 research including clinical features studies, pathological findings and therapeutic design, care facilities preparation and infection control, and maternal, perinatal and neonatal outcomes.

Drug targets for COVID-19 therapeutics: Ongoing global efforts

The current global pandemic COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has already inflicted insurmountable damage both to the human lives and global economy. There is an immediate need for identification of effective drugs to contain the disastrous virus outbreak. Global efforts are already underway at a war footing to identify the best drug combination to address the disease. In this review, an attempt has been made to understand the SARS-CoV-2 life cycle, and based on this information potential druggable targets against SARS-CoV-2 are summarized. Also, the strategies for ongoing and future drug discovery against the SARS-CoV-2 virus are outlined. Given the urgency to find a definitive cure, ongoing drug repurposing efforts being carried out by various organizations are also described. The unprecedented crisis requires extraordinary efforts from the scientific community to effectively address the issue and prevent further loss of human lives and health.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an evidence map of medical literature

BACKGROUND

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in December 2019, a substantial body of COVID-19 medical literature has been generated. As of June 2020, gaps and longitudinal trends in the COVID-19 medical literature remain unidentified, despite potential benefits for research prioritisation and policy setting in both the COVID-19 pandemic and future large-scale public health crises.

METHODS

In this paper, we searched PubMed and Embase for medical literature on COVID-19 between 1 January and 24 March 2020. We characterised the growth of the early COVID-19 medical literature using evidence maps and bibliometric analyses to elicit cross-sectional and longitudinal trends and systematically identify gaps.

RESULTS

The early COVID-19 medical literature originated primarily from Asia and focused mainly on clinical features and diagnosis of the disease. Many areas of potential research remain underexplored, such as mental health, the use of novel technologies and artificial intelligence, pathophysiology of COVID-19 within different body systems, and indirect effects of COVID-19 on the care of non-COVID-19 patients. Few articles involved research collaboration at the international level (24.7%). The median submission-to-publication duration was 8 days (interquartile range: 4-16).

CONCLUSIONS

Although in its early phase, COVID-19 research has generated a large volume of publications. However, there are still knowledge gaps yet to be filled and areas for improvement for the global research community. Our analysis of early COVID-19 research may be valuable in informing research prioritisation and policy planning both in the current COVID-19 pandemic and similar global health crises.

Global academic response to COVID-19: Cross-sectional study

This study explores the response to COVID‐19 from investigators, editors, and publishers and seeks to define challenges during the early stages of the pandemic. A cross‐sectional bibliometric review of COVID‐19 literature was undertaken between 1 November 2019 and 24 March 2020, along with a comparative review of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) literature. Investigator responsiveness was assessed by measuring the volume and type of research published. Editorial responsiveness was assessed by measuring the submission‐to‐acceptance time and availability of original data. Publisher‐responsiveness was assessed by measuring the acceptance‐to‐publication time and the provision of open access. Three hundred and ninety‐eight of 2,835 COVID‐19 and 55 of 1,513 MERS search results were eligible. Most COVID‐19 studies were clinical reports (n = 242; 60.8%). The submission‐to‐acceptance [median: 5 days (IQR: 3–11) versus 71.5 days (38–106); P < .001] and acceptance‐to‐publication [median: 5 days (IQR: 2–8) versus 22.5 days (4–48·5‐; P < .001] times were strikingly shorter for COVID‐19. Almost all COVID‐19 (n = 396; 99.5%) and MERS (n = 55; 100%) studies were open‐access. Data sharing was infrequent, with original data available for 104 (26.1%) COVID‐19 and 10 (18.2%) MERS studies (P = .203). The early academic response was characterized by investigators aiming to define the disease. Studies were made rapidly and openly available. Only one‐in‐four were published alongside original data, which is a key target for improvement.

Neurological manifestations and complications of COVID-19: A literature review

The Coronavirus disease due to SARS-CoV-2 emerged in Wuhan city, China in December 2019 and rapidly spread to more than 200 countries as a global health pandemic. There are more than 3.5 million confirmed cases and around 165,000 to 243,000 fatalities. The primary manifestation is respiratory and cardiac but neurological features are also being reported in the literature as case reports and case series. The most common reported symptoms to include headache and dizziness followed by encephalopathy and delirium. Among the complications noted are Cerebrovascular accident, Guillian barre syndrome, acute transverse myelitis, and acute encephalitis. The most common peripheral manifestation was hyposmia. It is further noted that sometimes the neurological manifestations can precede the typical features like fever and cough and later on typical manifestations develop in these patients. Hence a high index of suspicion is required for timely diagnosis and isolation of cases to prevent the spread in neurology wards. We present a narrative review of the neurological manifestations and complications of COVID-19. Our aim is to update the neurologists and physicians working with suspected cases of COVID-19 about the possible neurological presentations and the probable neurological complications resulting from this novel virus infection.

Preliminary analysis of COVID-19 academic information patterns: a call for open science in the times of closed borders

The Pandemic of COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 motivated the scientific community to work together in order to gather, organize, process and distribute data on the novel biomedical hazard. Here, we analyzed how the scientific community responded to this challenge by quantifying distribution and availability patterns of the academic information related to COVID-19. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of the information flow and scientific collaboration, two factors we believe to be critical for finding new solutions for the ongoing pandemic. The RISmed R package, and a custom Python script were used to fetch metadata on articles indexed in PubMed and published on Rxiv preprint server. Scopus was manually searched and the metadata was exported in BibTex file. Publication rate and publication status, affiliation and author count per article, and submission-to-publication time were analysed in R. Biblioshiny application was used to create a world collaboration map. Preliminary data suggest that COVID-19 pandemic resulted in generation of a large amount of scientific data, and demonstrates potential problems regarding the information velocity, availability, and scientific collaboration in the early stages of the pandemic. More specifically, the results indicate precarious overload of the standard publication systems, significant problems with data availability and apparent deficient collaboration. In conclusion, we believe the scientific community could have used the data more efficiently in order to create proper foundations for finding new solutions for the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, we believe we can learn from this on the go and adopt open science principles and a more mindful approach to COVID-19-related data to accelerate the discovery of more efficient solutions. We take this opportunity to invite our colleagues to contribute to this global scientific collaboration by publishing their findings with maximal transparency.

Air contamination with SARS-CoV-2 in the operating room

Angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is a target cell receptor for internalization and proliferation of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). When ACE2-highly expressed tissues are manipulated, SARS-CoV-2 containing aerosols may be generated. Normal breathing and speaking are capable of producing aerosols so mask ventilation, suction of airway tract and bucking during tracheal intubation and extubation are clinical procedures capable of significant aerosol production. Whilst no data have been reported on the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 in the operating room (OR), contamination in the OR can be estimated from the intensive care unit (ICU) data. ICU data showed that SARS-CoV-2 was detected on all types of surface and in air within about 4 m from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. High concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in the personal protective equipment (PPE) removal room and medical staff office. Submicron virus-laden aerosols could result from resuspension of particles containing SARS-CoV-2 sticking the PPE surface; removal could produce the initial velocity. Supermicron virus-laden aerosol could come from floor deposited SARS-CoV-2, which were carried across different areas by medical staff (e.g., shoe). Knowledge of aerosol generation and distribution in the OR will aid the design of strategies to reduce transmission risk.

Studies of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Global Analysis of Literature

Novel coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is a global threat to millions of lives. Enormous efforts in knowledge production have been made in the last few months, requiring a comprehensive analysis to examine the research gaps and to help guide an agenda for further studies. This study aims to explore the current research foci and their country variations regarding levels of income and COVID-19 transmission features. This textual analysis of 5780 publications extracted from the Web of Science, Medline, and Scopus databases was performed to explore the current research foci and propose further research agenda. The Latent Dirichlet allocation was used for topic modeling. Regression analysis was conducted to examine country variations in the research foci. Results indicate that publications are mainly contributed by the United States, China, and European countries. Guidelines for emergency care and surgical, viral pathogenesis, and global responses in the COVID-19 pandemic are the most common topics. There is variation in the research approaches to mitigate COVID-19 problems in countries with different income and transmission levels. Findings highlighted the need for global research collaborations among high- and low/middle-income countries in the different stages of pandemic prevention and control.