Systematic review of bibliometric studies on SARS-CoV-2
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To perform a systematic review of articles that evaluated the scientific production on SARS-CoV-2 through bibliometric analyzes. Methods: Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases were used. After applying the pre-established inclusion criteria, 30 articles were included. Results. The total number of articles found in the bibliometric studies on SARS-CoV-2 varied widely from 153 to 21,395 articles and an average equal to 4,279 (± 5,510). A total of 17 countries published within the scope of this study, but only six published more than one article, emphasizing authors from Chinese institutions (17%). Scopus was the most used database in bibliometric studies (50%, n = 15). The articles used 72 different keywords with emphasis on: COVID-19 (15%), SARS-CoV-2 (12%) and 2019-nCoV (9%). Conclusion. We are facing an unprecedented scenario of information about SARS-CoV-2 and this has required a collective scientific effort reflected in the daily publication of hundreds of studies (articles, pre-prints, clinical guides, protocols). Bibliometric methods are being increasingly used by the scientific community to systematize this information. Therefore, the systematic review carried out in this study provided an overview of the bibliometric literature on the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Article Details
Authors maintain copyright and grant the HSJ the right to first publication. From 2024, the publications wiil be licensed under Attribution 4.0 International 
, allowing their sharing, recognizing the authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are authorized to assume additional contracts separately for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any point after the editorial process.
Also, the AUTHOR is informed and consents that the HSJ can incorporate his article into existing or future scientific databases and indexers, under the conditions defined by the latter at all times, which will involve, at least, the possibility that the holders of these databases can perform the following actions on the article.
References
Chan JFW, Yuan S, Kok KH, et al. A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person transmission: a study of a family cluster. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):514–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9
Li Q, Guan X, Wu P, et al. Early transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(13):1199–207. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001316 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001316
Gorbalenya AE, Baker SC, Baric RS, et al. The species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: classifying 2019-nCoV and naming it SARS-CoV-2. Nat Microbiol. 2020;5(4):536–44. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-020-0695-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-020-0695-z
PMid:32123347
Ceraolo C, Giorgi FM. Genomic variance of the 2019-nCoV coronavirus. J Med Virol. 2020;92(5):522–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25700 PMid:32027036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25700
Wong MC, Cregeen SJJ, Ajami NJ, Petrosino JF. Evidence of recombination in coronaviruses implicating pangolin origins of nCoV-2019. bioRxiv [preprint]. 2020;2013:2020.02.07.939207. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.07.939207 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.07.939207
Zhang L, Zhao W, Sun B, Huang Y, Glänzel W. How scientific research reacts to international public health emergencies: a global analysis of response patterns. Scientometrics. 2020;124(1):747–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03531-4 PMid:32836522 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03531-4
Rinaldi B, Rinaldi JP. Available evidence on risk factors associated with COVID-19’s poorer outcomes, worldwide and in Brazil. Rev Cienc Saude. 2020;10(2):80–9. https://doi.org/10.21876/rcshci.v10i2.985 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21876/rcshci.v10i2.985
Bar-Ilan J. Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2010;82(3):495–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0185-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0185-9
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 PMCID: PMC2707599 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Chahrour M, Assi S, Bejjani M, et al. A bibliometric analysis of Covid-19 research activity: A call for increased output. Cureus. 2020;12(3): e7357. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7357 PMid: 32328369 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7357
Hamidah I, Sriyono S, Hudha MN. A Bibliometric analysis of Covid-19 research using VOSviewer. Indon J Sci Technol [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Sep 22];5(2):34-41. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijost.v5i2.24522 Avaiable from: https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/ijost/article/view/24522
Melo MC, Cabral ERM, Rolim ACA, et al. A bibliometric analysis of global researches at COVID-19: COVID-19 bibliometric analysis. Interam J Med Health. 2020;3:e202003019. https://doi.org/10.31005/iajmh.v3i0.88 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31005/iajmh.v3i0.88
Kumar K. Author productivity of COVID-19 research output globally: Testing Lotka's Law. SSRN [preprint]. 2020 Apr 6:1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3603889 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3603889
Dehghanbanadaki H, Seif F, Vahidi Y, et al. Bibliometric analysis of global scientific research on Coronavirus (COVID-19). Med J Islam Repub Iran [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Sep 22];34:51. Avaiable from: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-6629-en.pdf
Lou J, Tian SJ, Niu SM, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019: a bibliometric analysis and review. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020;24(6):3411-21. https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202003_20712
Belli S, Mugnaini R, Baltà J, Abadal E. Coronavirus mapping in scientific publications: when science advances rapidly and collectively, is access to this knowledge open to society? Scientometrics. 2020;124:2661–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03590-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03590-7
Liu N, Chee ML, Niu C, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an evidence map of medical literature. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20:177. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01059-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01059-y
Haghani M, Bliemer MCJ. Covid-19 pandemic and the unprecedented mobilisation of scholarly efforts prompted by a health crisis: Scientometric comparisons across SARS, MERS and 2019-nCov literature. bioRxiv [preprint]. 2020 Jun 1 [cited 2020 Sep 22];2006.00674. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.00674 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.31.126813
Pathak M. COVID-19 research in India: a quantitative analysis. Indian J Biochem Biophys. 2020;57(3):351–5. Available from: http://nopr.niscair.res.in/handle/123456789/54461
Kousha K, Thelwall M. COVID-19 publications: Database coverage, citations, readers, tweets, news, Facebook walls, Reddit posts. Quant Sci Stud. 2020;1(3):1068-91. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00066 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00066
Fiesco-Sepúlveda KY, Serrano-Bermúdez LM. Contributions of Latin American researchers in the understanding of the novel coronavirus outbreak: a literature review. Peer J. 2020;8:e9332. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9332 PMId: 32547890 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9332
Hossain MM. Current status of global research on novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a bibliometric analysis and knowledge mapping [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2020;9:374. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23690.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23690.1
Torres-Salinas D. Daily growth rate of scientific production on Covid-19. Analysis in databases and open access repositories. El Profes Inform. 2020;29(2): e290215. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.15 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.15
Kirchhoff J, Mertens A, Scheufen M. Der Corona-Innovationswettlauf in der Wissenschaft: Eine Analyse der wissenschaftlichen Publikationen zur Bekämpfung der Corona-Pandemie und die Bedeutung für den Pharma-Standort Deutschland, IW-Report [Internet]. Köln: Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft (IW); 2020(17):30pp. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/216830
Hu YJ, Chen MM, Wang Q, et al. From SARS to COVID-19: A bibliometric study on emerging infectious diseases with natural language processing technologies. Research Square [preprint];2020 May 6 [cited 2020 Sep 22]. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-25354/v1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-25354/v1
Helliwell JA, Bolton WS, Burke JR, Tiernan JP, Jayne DG, Chapman SJ. Global academic response to COVID-19: Cross-sectional study. medRxiv [preprint]. 2020 May 3 [cited 2020 Sep 22]. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081414 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081414
Latif S, Usman M, Manzoor S, et al. Leveraging data science to combat COVID-19: A comprehensive review. TechRxiv [preprint]. 2020 Apr 30 [cited 2020 Sep 22]. https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.12212516.v1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.12212516.v1
O’Brien N, Barboza-Palomino M, Ventura-León J, Caycho-Rodríguez T, Sandoval-Díaz JS, López-López W, et al. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). A bibliometric analysis. Rev Chil Anest. 2020;49(3):408–15. https://doi.org/10.25237/revchilanestv49n03.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25237/revchilanestv49n03.020
Torres-Salinas D, Robinson-Garcia N, Castillo-Valdivieso PA. Open Access and Altmetrics in the pandemic age: Forescast analysis on COVID-19 related literature. BioRxiv [preprint]. 2020 Apr 26 [cited 2020 Sep 22]. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.23.057307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.23.057307
Tran BX, Ha GH, Nguyen LH, et al. Studies of novel coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic: A global analysis of literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(11):4095. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17114095 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17114095
Zhou Y, Chen L. Twenty-year span of global coronavirus research trends: a bibliometric analysis. In Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(9),3082. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093082 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093082
Haghani M, Bliemer MC, Goerlandt F, Li J. The scientific literature on Coronaviruses, COVID-19 and its associated safety-related research dimensions: A scientometric analysis and scoping review. Safety Sci. 2020;129:104806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104806 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104806
Aguado-Cortés C, Castaño VM. Translational knowledge map of COVID-19. arXiv [preprint]. 2020 Mar 22 [cited 2020 Sep 22]:2003.10434. Avaiable from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.10434
Gori AD, Boetto E, Fantini MP. Analysis of the scientific literature in the first 30 Days of the novel coronavirus outbreak. medRxiv [preprint]. 2020 Mar 30 [cited 2020 Sep 22]: 2020.03.25.20043315. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.25.20043315 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.25.20043315
Golinelli D, Nuzzolese AG, Boetto E, et al. The impact of early scientific literature in response to COVID-19: a scientometric perspective. medRxiv [preprint]. 2020 Apr 18 [cited 2020 Sep 22]. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.15.20066183 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.15.20066183
Kambhampati SB, Vaishya R, Vaish A. Unprecedented surge in publications related to COVID-19 in the first three months of pandemic: A bibliometric analytic report. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(Suppl3):S304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.030 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.030
Bhattacharya S, Singh S. Visible Insights of the Invisible Pandemic: A Scientometric, Altmetric and Topic Trend Analysis. arXiv [preprint]. 2020 Apr 22[cited 2020 Sep 22]:arXiv:2004.10878. Avaiable from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.10878
Zhang L, Li B, Jia P, et al. [An analysis of global research on SARS-CoV-2]. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. 2020;37(2):236-45. Chinese. https://doi.org/10.7507/1001-5515.202002034. PMID: 32329275.
Rathbone J, Carter M, Hoffmann T, Glasziou P. A comparison of the performance of seven key bibliographic databases in identifying all relevant systematic reviews of interventions for hypertension. Syst Rev. 2016;5:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0197-5 PMID: 26862061 PMCID: PMC4748526 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0197-5
Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: How will we ever keep up? PLoS Med. 2010;7(9):e1000326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326 PMID:20877712 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326
Cavacini A. What is the best database for computer science journal articles? Scientometrics. 2015;102(3):2059–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1506-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1506-1
Freeman MK, Lauderdale SA, Kendrach MG, Woolley TW. Google scholar versus PubMed in locating primary literature to answer drug-related questions. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43(3):478–84. https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L223 PMID:19261965 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L223
Berg JM, Bhalla N, Bourne PE, et al. Preprints for the life sciences. Science. 2016;352(6288):899-901 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf9133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf9133
Haustein S, Larivière V. The use of bibliometrics for assessing research: Possibilities, limitations and adverse effects. Incent Perform Gov Res Organ. 2015;121–39. https://crc.ebsi.umontreal.ca/files/sites/60/2015/10/HausteinLariviere_revised2.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09785-5_8
McKiernan EC, Schimanski LA, Muñoz Nieves C, Matthias L, Niles MT, Alperin JP. Meta Research: Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations. Elife. 2019;8:e47338. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47338 PMid:31364991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47338
Ellegaard O, Wallin JA. The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? Scientometrics. 2015;105(3):1809–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z PMid:26594073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z
Nabout J, Parreira MR, Teresa FB, Carneiro FM, Da Cunha HF, De Souza Ondei L, et al. Publish (In a group) or perish (alone): The trend from single- to multi-authorship in biological papers. Scientometrics. 2015;102(1):357–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1385-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1385-5
Scopus [Internet site]. Elsevier. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 10]. Available from: https://service.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/15534/supporthub/scopus/#tips
PubMed [Internet site]. National Center for Biotechnology Information. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 10]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/about/
Web of Science [Internet site]. Clarivate. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 10]. Available from: https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/web-of-science/