» Articles » PMID: 37292336

An Analysis of Reporting Practices in the Top 100 Cited Health and Medicine-related Bibliometric Studies from 2019 to 2021 Based on a Proposed Guidelines

Overview
Journal Heliyon
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 2023 Jun 9
PMID 37292336
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Bibliometric analysis has gained popularity as a quantitative research methodology to evaluate scholarly productivity and identify trends within specific research areas. However, there are currently no established reporting guidelines for bibliometric studies. The present study aimed to investigate the reporting practices of bibliometric research related to health and medicine based on a guidelines "Preferred Reporting Items for Bibliometric Analysis (PRIBA)" proposed in this study. The Science Citation Index, Expanded of the Web of Science was used to identify the top 100 articles with the highest normalized citation counts per year. The search was conducted on April 9, 2022, using the search topic "bibliometric" and including publications from 2019 to 2021. The results substantiated the need for a standardized reporting guideline for bibliometric research. Specifically, among the 25 proposed items in the PRIBA, only five were consistently reported across all articles examined. Further, 11 items were reported by at least 80% of the articles, while nine items were reported by less than 80% of the articles. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the reporting practices of bibliometric studies in the field of health and medicine are in need of improvement. Future research should be conducted to refine the PRIBA guidelines.

Citing Articles

A Bibliometric Analysis of Healthcare Intervention-Related Studies Reporting Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement.

Lu W, Li Y, Montayre J, Li M, Ho K, Li J Healthcare (Basel). 2025; 13(3).

PMID: 39942494 PMC: 11817042. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare13030305.


Advanced practice nursing in Brazil: bibliometric analysis of dissertations and theses.

Dantas A, Araujo M, Naiara de Medeiros Araujo J, Medeiros A, Santos P, Coutinho Borges B Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2025; 58():e20240253.

PMID: 39821224 PMC: 11740733. DOI: 10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0253en.


Global research hotspots and trends in anti-inflammatory studies in dry eye: a bibliometric analysis (2004-2024).

Wang S, Zheng W, Li T, Yu D, Zhang Q, Ju Y Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1451990.

PMID: 39669988 PMC: 11634594. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1451990.


The use of bibliometrics in nursing science: Topics, data sources and contributions to research and practice.

Mezquita B, Alfonso-Arias C, Martinez-Jaimez P, Borrego A Nurs Open. 2024; 11(9):e70036.

PMID: 39279488 PMC: 11403276. DOI: 10.1002/nop2.70036.


Global research trends in transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke (1994-2023): promising, yet requiring further practice.

Li X, Hu R, Lou T, Liu Y, Ding L Front Neurol. 2024; 15:1424545.

PMID: 39268062 PMC: 11390666. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1424545.


References
1.
Page M, Nguyen P, Hamilton D, Haddaway N, Kanukula R, Moher D . Data and code availability statements in systematic reviews of interventions were often missing or inaccurate: a content analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022; 147:1-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.03.003. View

2.
Kulkarni A, Aziz B, Shams I, Busse J . Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA. 2009; 302(10):1092-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.1307. View

3.
Szomszor M, Adams J, Fry R, Gebert C, Pendlebury D, Potter R . Interpreting Bibliometric Data. Front Res Metr Anal. 2021; 5:628703. PMC: 8025976. DOI: 10.3389/frma.2020.628703. View

4.
Simera I, Moher D, Hoey J, Schulz K, Altman D . A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research. Eur J Clin Invest. 2010; 40(1):35-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02234.x. View

5.
Poder E . What Is Wrong With the Current Evaluative Bibliometrics?. Front Res Metr Anal. 2022; 6:824518. PMC: 8814649. DOI: 10.3389/frma.2021.824518. View