Analysis of the scientific literature in the first 30 Days of the novel coronavirus outbreak.
GORI, D.; Boetto, E.; Fantini, M. P.
Show abstract
IntroductionRecent events highlight how emerging and re-emerging pathogens are becoming global challenges for public health. In December 2019, a novel coronavirus has emerged. This has suddenly turned out into global health concern. ObjectivesAim of this research is to focus on the bibliometric aspects in order to measure what is published in the first 30-days of a global epidemic outbreak MethodsWe searched PubMed database in order to find all relevant studies in the first 30-days from the first publication. ResultsFrom the initial 442 identified articles, 234 were read in-extenso. The majority of papers come from China, UK and USA. 63.7% of the papers were commentaries, editorials and reported data and only 17.5% of the sources used data directly collected on the field. Topics mainly addressed were "epidemiology", "preparedness" and "generic discussion". NNR showed a reduction for both the objectives assessed from January to February. Conclusions"Diagnosis" and effective preventive and therapeutic measures were the fields in which more research is still needed. The vast majority of scientific literature in the first 30-days of an epidemic outbreak is based on reported data rather than primary data. Nevertheless, the scientific statements and public health decisions rely on these data. Strengths of our studyThis is the first bibliometric research in Pubmed Database on the first 30 days of publications regarding the novel Coronavirus (SARS-nCoV-2) outbreak of 2019. The vast majority of publication in the first 30-days of an epidemic outbreak are reported data or comments, and only a small fraction of the papers have directly collected data. Limitations of our studyOur research is only PubMed based. It ill be auspicable to consult more than one relevant database in future papers. In addition, we excluded non-English publications leading to a potential bias due to the fact that the outbreak started in China.
Matching journals
The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Laboratory Parameters Associated with Severe or Critical Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis 94%
- Clinical characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in Kuwait 94%
- Factors Associated with Disease Severity and Mortality among Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Studies of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Global Analysis of Literature 96%
- How the COVID-19 pandemic is shaping research in Africa: inequalities in scholarly output and collaborations and new opportunities for scientific leadership 92%
- Research on the Influence of Information Diffusion on the Transmission of the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimation of novel coronavirus (covid-19) reproduction number and case fatality rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis 95%
- Surveillance of seasonal respiratory viruses among Chilean patients during the COVID-19 pandemic 92%
- Towards the global equilibrium of COVID-19: statistical analysis of country–level data 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- The basic reproduction number and prediction of the epidemic size of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in Shahroud, Iran 94%
- The burden of isolation to the individual: a comparison between isolation for COVID-19 and for other influenza-like illnesses in Japan 92%
- Covid-19 and excess mortality rates not comparable across countries 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.