4.0 Article

The Impact of International Research Collaborations on the Citation Metrics and the Scientific Potential of South American Palliative Care Research: Bibliometric Analysis

期刊

ANNALS OF GLOBAL HEALTH
卷 87, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

UBIQUITY PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.3158

关键词

-

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2018/09836-8]
  2. Higher Education Personnel Improvement Coordination (CAPES) [33158010001P0]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that 18.2% of articles on palliative care in South America involved international research collaborations, which had a positive impact on the scientific potential and citations of the studies. Articles with collaborations had higher citation rates, were more frequently funded, and were published in prestigious journals such as Pubmed and WOS.
Background: Progress in palliative care (PC) requires scientific advances which could potentially be catalyzed by international research collaboration (IRC). It is currently not known how often IRC occurs with PC investigators in South America. Objectives: To evaluate the percentage of South America journal articles on PC involving IRCs and the impact of these collaborations on the scientific potential the studies and on their citations. Methods: This was a bibliometric analysis of studies published between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2017. A search of Pubmed. Embase. Lilacs, and Web of Science (WOS) was performed using the terms palliative care, hospice care. hospices and terminal care, combined with the name of South America countries. The scientific potential was assessed by analyzing study design, characteristics of the journal and funding. IRCs were further subdivided in internal (within South America countries) and external (with countries outside South America). Findings: Of the 641 articles, 117 (18.2%) involved IRCs (internal: 18, 2.8%; external: 110, 17.2%). Articles with IRCs had higher median two-year citations in WOS (2 vs. 1, p < 0.001), Scopus (3 vs. 1, p < 0.001) and Google Scholar (4.5 vs. 2, p < 0.001) compared to articles without IRC. Moreover, they were more often funded (40.7% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001), published in Pubmed-indexed (76.1% vs. 41.6%; p < 0.001) and in WOS-indexed (70.1% vs. 29.6%; p < 0.001) journals, and with study designs most often classified as clinical trial (5.1% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.002) and cohort (10.3% vs. 2.9%; p < 0.001) compared to articles without IRC. Conclusions: Studies with international research collaborations, both internal and external to South America, are more frequently cited and have characteristics with greater scientific potential than do studies without international collaborations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据