Objective. We analyzed the scientific output after COVID-19 and contrasted it with studies published in the aftermath of seven epidemics/pandemics: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Influenza A virus H5N1 and Influenza A virus H1N1 human infections, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Ebola virus disease, Zika virus disease, and Dengue. Design/Methodology/Approach. We examined bibliometric measures for COVID-19 and the rest of the studied epidemics/pandemics. Data were extracted from Web of Science, using its journal classification scheme as a proxy to quantify the multidisciplinary coverage of scientific output. We proposed a novel Thematic Dispersion Index (TDI) for the analysis of pandemic early stages. Results/Discussion. The literature on the seven epidemics/pandemics before COVID-19 has shown explosive growth of the scientific production and continuous impact during the first three years following each emergence or re-emergence of the specific infectious disease. A subsequent decline was observed with the progressive control of each health emergency. We observed an unprecedented growth in COVID-19 scientific production. TDI measured for COVID-19 (29,4) in just six months, was higher than TDI of the rest (7,5 to 21) during the first three years after epidemic initiation. Conclusions. COVID-19 literature showed the broadest subject coverage, which is clearly a consequence of its social, economic, and political impact. The proposed indicator (TDI), allowed the study of multidisciplinarity, differentiating the thematic complexity of COVID-19 from the previous seven epidemics/pandemics. Originality/Value. The multidisciplinary nature and thematic complexity of COVID-19 research were successfully analyzed through a scientometric perspective.@en
Array ( [dateOfAvailability] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [2020-12-22] => 151804 ) ) ) [hasAuthor] => Array ( [nn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge] => 57563 ) [1] => Array ( [Lourdes García-García] => 151828 ) [2] => Array ( [Ernesto Galban-Rodriguez] => 151829 ) [3] => Array ( [Humberto Carrillo-Calvet] => 148783 ) ) ) [hasFileStorage] => Array ( [nn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [_repository/142110/2020/12/oai_ojs2_colnes_org_article_13#00087.pdf] => 151967 ) ) ) [hasSubject] => Array ( [es] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Covid-19] => 227495 ) ) [en] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Multidisciplinarity] => 186672 ) [1] => Array ( [Pandemic diseases] => 151826 ) [2] => Array ( [Scientometrics] => 174750 ) [3] => Array ( [Bibliometric indicators] => 268466 ) [4] => Array ( [Scientific production] => 273771 ) [5] => Array ( [Citation analysis] => 265953 ) [6] => Array ( [Thematic dispersion index] => 151827 ) [7] => Array ( [Citation analysis] => 3133 ) ) ) [isPartOfSource] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Iberoamerican journal of science measurement and communication] => 142110 ) ) ) [hasIssueOf] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [ISSUE:JNL:00087-2020-1-] => 142659 ) ) ) [hasAbstract] => Array ( [en] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Objective. We analyzed the scientific output after COVID-19 and contrasted it with studies published in the aftermath of seven epidemics/pandemics: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Influenza A virus H5N1 and Influenza A virus H1N1 human infections, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Ebola virus disease, Zika virus disease, and Dengue. Design/Methodology/Approach. We examined bibliometric measures for COVID-19 and the rest of the studied epidemics/pandemics. Data were extracted from Web of Science, using its journal classification scheme as a proxy to quantify the multidisciplinary coverage of scientific output. We proposed a novel Thematic Dispersion Index (TDI) for the analysis of pandemic early stages. Results/Discussion. The literature on the seven epidemics/pandemics before COVID-19 has shown explosive growth of the scientific production and continuous impact during the first three years following each emergence or re-emergence of the specific infectious disease. A subsequent decline was observed with the progressive control of each health emergency. We observed an unprecedented growth in COVID-19 scientific production. TDI measured for COVID-19 (29,4) in just six months, was higher than TDI of the rest (7,5 to 21) during the first three years after epidemic initiation. Conclusions. COVID-19 literature showed the broadest subject coverage, which is clearly a consequence of its social, economic, and political impact. The proposed indicator (TDI), allowed the study of multidisciplinarity, differentiating the thematic complexity of COVID-19 from the previous seven epidemics/pandemics. Originality/Value. The multidisciplinary nature and thematic complexity of COVID-19 research were successfully analyzed through a scientometric perspective.] => 0 ) ) ) [hasID] => Array ( [nn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [oai:ojs2.colnes.org:article/13] => 0 ) ) ) [hasRegisterId] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [https://pub.colnes.org/index.php/ijsmc/article/view/13] => 0 ) [1] => Array ( [10.47909/ijsmc.13] => 0 ) ) ) [hasSource] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication; Vol. 1 No. 1 (2020): In progress] => 0 ) ) [nn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [2709-3158] => 0 ) [1] => Array ( [2709-7595] => 0 ) ) ) [hasTitle] => Array ( [en] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [The multidisciplinary nature of COVID-19 research] => 0 ) ) ) [hasUrl] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [https://pub.colnes.org/index.php/ijsmc/article/view/13/35] => 0 ) ) ) [prefLabel] => Array ( [pt] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [Oai:ojs2.colnes.org:article/13#00087] => 0 ) ) ) )
Loading ...