■在对两个医疗电子数据库进行了全面的文献检索后,PubMed和Embase,以及两个引文数据库,WebofScience核心收藏(WoS)和Scopus,我们旨在对医学研究中的医学史文献进行Altmetric和Scientometric分析。
以下软件工具用于分析从PubMed和Embase数据库中检索到的记录,并进行合作分析,以确定涉及科学医学论文的国家,以及聚类关键词,以揭示未来医学史研究的趋势。这些软件工具(VOSviewer1.6.18和Spss16)允许研究人员可视化文献计量网络,进行统计分析,并识别数据中的模式和趋势。
■我们的分析揭示了来自PubMed的53,771条记录和来自EMBASE数据库的54,405条记录,这些记录在医学史领域由105,286位WoS的撰稿人检索。我们确定了157个在科学医学论文上合作的国家。通过对59,995个关键字进行聚类,我们能够揭示未来医学史研究的趋势。我们的研究结果表明,传统文献计量学和社交媒体指标(如医学史文献中的Altmetric注意力评分)之间存在正相关(p<0.05)。
■在社会科学网络中分享文章的研究成果将增加医学史研究中科学著作的知名度,这是影响文章引用的最重要因素之一。此外,我们对医学领域文献的概述使我们能够识别和检查医学史研究中的空白。
UNASSIGNED: After conducting a comprehensive literature search of two medical electronic databases, PubMed and Embase, as well as two citation databases, Web of Science Core Collections (WoS) and Scopus, we aimed to conduct an Altmetric and Scientometric analysis of the History of Medicine literature in medical research.
UNASSIGNED: The following software tools were used for analyzing the retrieved records from PubMed and Embase databases and conducting a collaboration analysis to identify the countries involved in scientific medical papers, as well as clustering keywords to reveal the trend of History of Medicine research for the future. These software tools (VOSviewer 1.6.18 and Spss 16) allowed the researchers to visualize bibliometric networks, perform statistical analysis, and identify patterns and trends in the data.
UNASSIGNED: Our analysis revealed 53,771 records from PubMed and 54,405 records from EMBASE databases retrieved in the field of History of Medicine by 105,286 contributed authors in WoS. We identified 157 countries that collaborated on scientific medical papers. By clustering 59,995 keywords, we were able to reveal the trend of History of Medicine research for the future. Our findings showed a positive association between traditional bibliometrics and social media metrics such as the Altmetric Attention Score in the History of Medicine literature (p < 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: Sharing research findings of articles in social scientific networks will increase the visibility of scientific works in History of Medicine research, which is one of the most important factors influencing the citation of articles. Additionally, our overview of the literature in the medical field allowed us to identify and examine gaps in the History of Medicine research.