The publication impact of the first 100 THOR Network publications by bibliometric and social network analyses.
administration
blood center operations
health research methodology
Journal
Transfusion
ISSN: 1537-2995
Titre abrégé: Transfusion
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0417360
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2022
08 2022
Historique:
revised:
30
03
2022
received:
23
01
2022
accepted:
30
03
2022
pubmed:
30
6
2022
medline:
30
7
2022
entrez:
29
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A specialized international multidisciplinary group of investigators wanted to determine the performance and impact of publications presented at an annual conference over a 6 year period. Specifically, the group wanted to know if the influence of the conference publications extended beyond conference publication authors and attendees. Bibliometric methods and network analyses were used to evaluate the performance and impact of 100 peer-reviewed publications presented at the Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network Remote Damage Control Resuscitation (RCDR) Symposia from 2012 to 2017 (published 2013-2018). Further analysis was performed on the affiliations of conference attendees who attended from the years of 2012 to 2017. This project used normative and relative bibliometric measures and social network analysis to evaluate the performance and impact of 100 peer-reviewed publications presented at the Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network RDCR Symposia from 2012 to 2017. Publication and citation data were from Elsevier Scopus, a bibliographic citation database. Metrics from Elsevier SciVal were selected for the project to normalize for group size, year of publication, and document type. A six-year period of publications presented at the Symposia, published from 2013 to 2018, was selected for analysis. The publication and citation data were further analyzed using Elsevier SciVal and the iCite database from the National Institutes of Health Office of Portfolio Analysis. Sci2, VOSviewer, and Gephi were used for social network analyses and visualization. The 100 publications presented at the Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network Remote Damage Control Resuscitation (RCDR) Symposia from 2012 to 2017 demonstrate reach and influence beyond the authors of the THOR publications or the THOR attendees. Citations to the THOR publications were published in 10 languages and 313 unique journals, with author affiliations from 62 countries. Citation metrics for the THOR publications exceed global averages with 65% of the THOR publications being in the 25% citation percentiles. When benchmarking the THOR publications using six homogenous comparator groups, the THOR publications demonstrate higher citation metrics than any of the comparator groups with more citations per publication, a higher average of cited publications, higher FWCI and outputs in the top citation percentiles among the six groups. The Office of Portfolio Analysis (OPA) iCite database was used to calculate potential to translate for the THOR publications with 57 of the THOR publications cited by clinical articles with an average approximate potential to translate score of 65.3%. The value of international groups with sharing of research and knowledge are instrumental in enhancing the uptake for best practices for in medicine and treatment of hemorrhagic shock resuscitation. The use of bibliometric methods and network analyses, along with benchmarking, demonstrated reach and impact beyond the THOR Network. Limitations include use of a single source for analysis of publication and citation; and that publication data alone does not provide a full overview of research performance. Despite these limitations, bibliometric methods, social network analyses, and benchmarking can help centers better understand their impact.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A specialized international multidisciplinary group of investigators wanted to determine the performance and impact of publications presented at an annual conference over a 6 year period. Specifically, the group wanted to know if the influence of the conference publications extended beyond conference publication authors and attendees. Bibliometric methods and network analyses were used to evaluate the performance and impact of 100 peer-reviewed publications presented at the Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network Remote Damage Control Resuscitation (RCDR) Symposia from 2012 to 2017 (published 2013-2018). Further analysis was performed on the affiliations of conference attendees who attended from the years of 2012 to 2017.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
This project used normative and relative bibliometric measures and social network analysis to evaluate the performance and impact of 100 peer-reviewed publications presented at the Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network RDCR Symposia from 2012 to 2017. Publication and citation data were from Elsevier Scopus, a bibliographic citation database. Metrics from Elsevier SciVal were selected for the project to normalize for group size, year of publication, and document type. A six-year period of publications presented at the Symposia, published from 2013 to 2018, was selected for analysis. The publication and citation data were further analyzed using Elsevier SciVal and the iCite database from the National Institutes of Health Office of Portfolio Analysis. Sci2, VOSviewer, and Gephi were used for social network analyses and visualization.
RESULTS
The 100 publications presented at the Trauma Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research (THOR) Network Remote Damage Control Resuscitation (RCDR) Symposia from 2012 to 2017 demonstrate reach and influence beyond the authors of the THOR publications or the THOR attendees. Citations to the THOR publications were published in 10 languages and 313 unique journals, with author affiliations from 62 countries. Citation metrics for the THOR publications exceed global averages with 65% of the THOR publications being in the 25% citation percentiles. When benchmarking the THOR publications using six homogenous comparator groups, the THOR publications demonstrate higher citation metrics than any of the comparator groups with more citations per publication, a higher average of cited publications, higher FWCI and outputs in the top citation percentiles among the six groups. The Office of Portfolio Analysis (OPA) iCite database was used to calculate potential to translate for the THOR publications with 57 of the THOR publications cited by clinical articles with an average approximate potential to translate score of 65.3%.
CONCLUSIONS
The value of international groups with sharing of research and knowledge are instrumental in enhancing the uptake for best practices for in medicine and treatment of hemorrhagic shock resuscitation. The use of bibliometric methods and network analyses, along with benchmarking, demonstrated reach and impact beyond the THOR Network. Limitations include use of a single source for analysis of publication and citation; and that publication data alone does not provide a full overview of research performance. Despite these limitations, bibliometric methods, social network analyses, and benchmarking can help centers better understand their impact.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
S1-S11Informations de copyright
© 2022 Crown copyright. Transfusion © 2022 AABB. This article is published with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.
Références
Pritchard A. Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. J Doc. 1969;25:348.
Durieux V, Gevenois PA. Bibliometric indicators: quality measurements of scientific publication 1. Radiology. 2010;255(2):342-51.
Narin F. Evaluative bibliometrics: the use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity. Computer Horizons. 1976.
Rosas SR, Kagan JM, Schouten JT, Slack PA, Trochim WMK. Evaluating research and impact: a bibliometric analysis of research by the NIH/NIAID HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks. PLoS One. 2011;6(3):e17428.
Scopus E. Elsevier Scopus Content Coverage Guide. 2020 [Internet]. Available from: https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/69451/Scopus_ContentCoverage_Guide_WEB.pdf
Te V, Floden N, Hussain S, Brolan CE, Hill PS. What did the Go4Health policy research project contribute to the policy discourse on the sustainable development goals? A reflexive review. Glob Health. 2018;14(1):51.
Aldieri L, Kotsemir M, Vinci CP. The impact of research collaboration on academic performance: an empirical analysis for some European countries. Socio Econ Plan Sci. 2018;62:13-30.
Coleridge DL. Snowball Metrics Recipe Book [Internet]. Available from: https://snowballmetrics.com/wp-content/uploads/0211-Snowball-Metrics-Recipe-Book-v7-LO-1.pdf
Hutchins BI, Yuan X, Anderson JM, Santangelo GM. Relative citation ratio (RCR): a new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level. PLoS Biol. 2016;14(9):e1002541.
Grogan D, Reddy V, Gupta A, Chang Y-F, Fields D, Agarwal N. Trends in academic spine neurosurgeon productivity as measured by the relative citation ratio. World Neurosurg. 2021;147:e40-6.
Rock CB, Prabhu AV, Fuller CD, Thomas CR, Holliday EB. Evaluation of the relative citation ratio, a new National Institutes of Health-supported bibliometric measure of research productivity, among academic radiation oncologists. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(3):469-74.
Sci2 Team. Science of Science (Sci2) tool. Indiana University and SciTech Strategies. 2009. Available from: https://sci2.cns.iu.edu
Reddy V, Gupta A, White MD, Gupta R, Agarwal P, Prabhu AV, et al. Assessment of the NIH-supported relative citation ratio as a measure of research productivity among 1687 academic neurological surgeons. J Neurosurg. 2021;134(2):638-45.
Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. VOSviewer: Visualizing scientific landscapes [software]. 2010. Available from https://www.vosviewer.com
Vogel AL, Perin DMP, Lu Y-L, Taplin SH. Understanding the value of international research networks: an evaluation of the international cancer screening network of the US National Cancer Institute. J Glob Oncol. 2019;5(5):1-12.
Deaton TG, Auten JD, Betzold R, Butler FK, Byrne T, Cap AP, et al. Fluid resuscitation in tactical combat casualty care; TCCC guidelines change 21-01. 4 November 2021. J Spec Oper Med. 2021;21(4):126-37.
Group T-A Working. LTOWB Press Release.
O'Leary JD, Crawford MW, Jurczyk E, Buchan A. Benchmarking bibliometrics in biomedical research: research performance of the University of Toronto's Faculty of Medicine, 2008-2012. Scientometrics. 2015;105(1):311-21.
Hashmi ZG, Chehab M, Nathens AB, Joseph B, Bank EA, Jansen JO, et al. Whole truths but half the blood: addressing the gap between the evidence and practice of pre-hospital and in-hospital blood product use for trauma resuscitation. Transfusion. 2021;61(S1):S348-53.