Using sentiment analysis to identify similarities and differences in research topics and medical subject headings (MeSH terms) between Medicine (Baltimore) and the Journal of the Formosan Medical Association (JFMA) in 2020: A bibliometric study

Identifying authorial roles in research: A Kano model-based bibliometric analysis for the Journal of Medicine (Baltimore) 2023

The landscape of research roles within academic journals often remains uncharted territory, with authorial contributions frequently reduced to linear hierarchies (e.g., professor and assistant professor). The Kano model, traditionally used in customer satisfaction research, offers a nuanced framework for identifying the multifaceted roles of authors in scholarly publications. This study utilizes the Kano model to dissect and categorize the roles of authors in the medicine field. To conform to the hypothesis, China is the research leader while the US is the research collaborator, as reflected in the publications of the journal of Medicine (Baltimore) in the year 2023. We conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of all research articles published in the journal of Medicine (Baltimore) in 2023. The Kano model was applied to classify authors into 5 categories reflective of their research roles: followers, leaders, partners, contributors, and collaborators. Data on author publications and co-authorship networks with multi-author rates (MARs) were analyzed to assign Kano categories based on the authorship positions of first and corresponding authors. Descriptive statistics and network analysis tools were used to interpret the data, including radar plots, geographical maps, and Kano diagrams. The analysis covered 1976 articles, uncovering a complex network of author roles that extends beyond the conventional binary distinction of lead and supporting authors (i.e., leading, and following researchers). A research leader in China and a collaborator in the US were conformed to support the hypothesis, based on their publications (1148 vs 51) and MARs (12.20% vs 19.61%). The Kano classification was visually adapted to classify authors (or entities) into 5 categories. The combined choropleth and geographical network maps were illustrated to identify author roles in research briefly. The Kano model serves as an effective tool for uncovering the diverse contributions of authors in medical research. By moving beyond the lead and follower dichotomy, this study highlights the intricate ecosystem of authorial roles, emphasizing the importance of each in advancing knowledge within the field of medicine. Future application of the Kano model could foster a more collaborative and inclusive recognition of contributions across various disciplines.

Using the forest plot to compare citation achievements in bibliographic and meta-analysis studies since 2011 using data on PubMed Central: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

We saw a steady increase in the number of bibliographic studies published over the years. The reason for this rise is attributed to the better accessibility of bibliographic data and software packages that specialize in bibliographic analyses. Any difference in citation achievements between bibliographic and meta-analysis studies observed so far need to be verified. In this study, we aimed to identify the frequently observed MeSH terms in these 2 types of study and investigate whether the highlighted MeSH terms are strongly associated with one of the study types.

METHODS

By searching the PubMed Central database, 5121 articles relevant to bibliometric and meta-analysis studies were downloaded since 2011. Social network analysis was applied to highlight the major MeSH terms of quantitative and statistical methods in these 2 types of studies. MeSH terms were then individually tested for any differences in event counts over the years between study types using odds of 95% confidence intervals for comparison.

RESULTS

In these 2 studies, we found that the most productive countries were the United States (19.9%), followed by the United Kingdom (8.8%) and China (8.7%); the most number of articles were published in PLoS One (2.9%), Stat Med (2.5%), and Res Synth (2.4%); and the most frequently observed MeSH terms were statistics and numerical data in bibliographic studies and methods in meta-analysis. Differences were found when compared to the event counts and the citation achievements in these 2 study types.

CONCLUSION

The breakthrough was made by developing a dashboard using forest plots to display the difference in event counts. The visualization of the observed MeSH terms could be replicated for future academic pursuits and applications in other disciplines using the odds of 95% confidence intervals.