• 中国核心期刊(遴选)数据库收录期刊
  • 中文科技期刊数据库收录期刊
  • 中国期刊全文数据库收录期刊
  • 中国学术期刊综合评价数据库统计源期刊等

• 专栏 • 上一篇    下一篇

Scoping Review作者研究能力与合作情况现状分析

高亚,葛龙,郭述金,温庆辉,李伦,张俊华,田金徽   

  1. 兰州大学循证医学中心,兰州大学循证医学中心,国家食品药品监督管理总局信息中心;国家食品药品监督管理总局信息中心,国家食品药品监督管理总局信息中心;国家食品药品监督管理总局信息中心,,,兰州大学循证医学中心
  • 收稿日期:2018-10-11 修回日期:2018-10-11 出版日期:2018-12-25 发布日期:2018-12-25
  • 基金资助:
    ]甘肃省循证医学与临床转化重点实验室开放基金(项目编号:20170203;项目名称:循证医学方法学研究)

Situation Analysis on Research Ability and Cooperation of Researchers Based on the Scoping Review

GAO Ya,,,,, and   

  1. Evidence-based Medicine Center,School of Basic Medical Sciences,Lanzhou University,Gansu Lanzhou,Evidence-based Medicine Center,School of Basic Medical Sciences,Lanzhou University,Gansu Lanzhou,Information Center of China Food and Drug Administration,Info
  • Received:2018-10-11 Revised:2018-10-11 Online:2018-12-25 Published:2018-12-25

摘要: 了解Scoping review的作者研究能力与合作情况,以期为Scoping review研究者开展相关研究提供借鉴和参考。方法:通过检索PubMed、EMBASE.com、Cochrane library数据库纳入Scoping review外文研究,采用BICOMS-2分析软件对期刊、发表时间、国家、城市和作者进行抽取和整理,并生成作者共现矩阵,利用NetDraw绘制网络关系图。结果:2 292篇Scoping review刊载在820种期刊上,研究数量呈逐年上升趋势,2 026名作者参与了研究的发表,90.57%的作者只参与撰写1篇文献,发文量大于5篇的作者仅有3人,主要作者分为3个主要的研究团体,每个团体内部仅有2人,各团体之间没有合作。结论:缺乏长期发表Scoping review研究的期刊,研究数量呈逐渐增长的趋势;参与的作者较多,高产的作者极少,且作者之间的合作有待加强。

Abstract: Objective:To understand the research ability and cooperation of in Scoping review, with a view to providing the reference for researchers of Scoping review. Methods:The PubMed, EMBASE.com and Cochrane library databases were searched for Scoping review. The BICOMS-2 analysis software was used to extract journals, publication time, countries, cities, and authors, and to generate author co-occurrence matrices. NetDraw was used to draw Network diagram. Results:2 292 Scoping review were published in 820 journals. The number of researches increased year by year, 2 026 authors participated in the publication of the study, 90.57% of the authors only participated in the writing of one document, and only 3 authors with more than 5 articles were published. The main authors are divided into three main research groups, each with only two people, and there was no cooperation between the groups. Conclusion:There was a lack of long-term publication of the Scoping review. The number of studies was gradually increasing. There were more authors participating in the study, there were very few authors with high yields, and cooperation between authors needs to be strengthened.