1975 ve 2018 yılları arasında yayınlanan Bacillus anthracis araştırmalarının bibliyometrik analizi

Öz

Amaç: Bibliyometri, atıf oranları, içerik, yazar ilişkileri ve üretkenlik gibi istatistiksel prosedürleri kullanarak dergilerin ve yazarların akademik kalitesini kantitatif olarak değerlendiren bir alandır. Her ne kadar şarbon küresel olarak hala önemli olsa da, bilimsel literatürde şarbon literatürünün bibliyometrik bir değerlendirmesi yoktur. Bu çalışmada, şarbonun bibliyometrik analizinin yapılması amaçlanmıştır.

Yöntemler: Bu çalışmadaki veriler, 1975 - Aralık 2018 tarihleri arasında, Thomson Reuters Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY, USA) very tabanından elde edildi. Veritabanında 1975 yılına kadar erişilebilir ve “Title” bölümünde [Bacillus anthracis veya anthrax] anahtar kelimeler kullanılarak tüm dökümanlarda aradık.

Bulgular: WoS (Web of Science) veritabanında toplam 5557 yayın bulundu. Yayınların yarısından fazlası orijinal makalelerdi (n=3828, %68,8). En fazla yayını olan ülke Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’ni (n=3203), İngiltere (n=301) ve Fransa (n=264) takip etti. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention, şarbon ile ilgili 210 yayın ve literatürün %3,7’si ile en fazla yayın yapan kurumdu. En üretken yazarlar sırasıyla Leppla SH, Collier RJ ve Mock M (n=236, 124, 101 yayın) oldu. En üretken dergi, 241 yazı ile yayınların %4,3’ünü kapsayan Infection and Immunity dergisiydi.

Sonuç: Şarbon ile ilgili literatürdeki bu ilk bibliyometrik çalışmada, endemik olmayan gelişmiş ülkelerin şarbon literatürüne hâkim olduğunu bulduk. Bu çalışma, dünyanın bazı bölgelerinde endemik olan şarbonun araştırılmasıyla ilgili ileri çalışmaları teşvik edecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bibliyometri,Atıf analizi,Şarbon,Bacillus anthracis

A bibliometric analysis of Bacillus anthracis research published between 1975 and 2018

Abstract

Aim: Bibliometrics is a recent field and is performed to quantitatively assess the academic quality of journals or authors using statistical procedures such as citation rates, contents, authorship relations and productivity. Although anthrax still remains important globally, the scientific literature lacks a bibliometric assessment of the anthrax literature. In this study, it is aimed to perform the bibliometric analysis of anthrax.

Methods: The data in this study were extracted from the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY, USA) from 1975 to December 2018. The database is accessible back to 1975 and we searched all documents using keywords [Bacillus anthracis OR anthrax] in the “Title” field.

Results: WoS database search recorded a total of 5557 publications. More than half of the publications were original articles (n=3828, 68.8%). The country with the greatest number of publications was the United States of America (n=3203), followed by England (n=301) and France (n=264). The Center for Disease Control and Prevention had the most published documents about anthrax with 210 papers and 3.7% of the total literature. The most productive authors are Leppla SH, Collier RJ, and Mock M (n=236, 124, 101 documents), respectively. The most productive journal was Infection and Immunity, which covered 4.3% of the publications with 241 manuscripts.

Conclusion: In this first bibliometric study in the literature about anthrax we found that nonendemic developed countries dominated the anthrax literature. This study will encourage further studies about the investigation of anthrax, which is endemic in some parts of the world.

Keywords

• Bibliometrics,Citation analysis,Anthrax,Bacillus anthracis

Kaynakça

1. 1. Dikmen AU, Aksakal FNB, Aycan Z, Aycan S. Prevalence of influenza vaccination among health care workers and adverse effects after vaccination: A crosssectional study. J Surg Med. 2019;3:520-4.
2. 2. Leppla SH. Anthrax toxin edema factor: a bacterial adenylate cyclase that increases cyclic AMP concentrations of eukaryotic cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1982;79:3162-6.
3. 3. Sterne M. Variation in Bacillus anthracis. Onderstepoort J Vet Sci Anim Ind. 1937;8:271–349.
4. 4. Blackburn JK, Curtis A, Hadfield TL, O'Shea B, Mitchell MA, Hugh-Jones ME. Confirmation of bacillus anthracis from flesh-eating flies collected during a West Texas anthrax season. J. Wildl Dis. 2010;46:918-22.
5. 5. Mwakapeje ER, Høgset S, Fyumagwa R, Nonga HE, Mdegela RH, Skjerve E. Anthrax outbreaks in the humans - livestock and wildlife interface areas of Northern Tanzania: a retrospective record review 2006–2016. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:106.
6. 6. Anthrax in humans and animals. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2008.
7. 7. Sean Shandomy AEI, Raizman E, Bruni M, Palamara E, Pittiglio C, Lubroth J. Anthrax outbreaks: a warning for improved prevention, control and heightened awareness. [e-mail]/www.fao.org/ag/empres.html. 2016;37. Accessed on 3rd March, 2017
8. 8. Maksimović Z, Cornwell MS, Semren O, Rifatbegović M. The apparent role of climate change in a recent anthrax outbreak in cattle. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz. 2017;36:959-96.

9. 9. Black H, Chapman A, Inverarity D, Sinha S. Heroin-associated anthrax with minimal morbidity. BMJ Case Rep. 2017 Mar 8;2017. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2016-218316.
10. 10. Narayanan N, Lacy CR, Cruz JE, Nahass M, Karp J, Barone JA, et al. Disaster Preparedness: Biological Threats and Treatment Options. Pharmacotherapy. 2018;38: 217-34.
11. 11. Egghe L, Rousseau R. Introduction to informetrics: Quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science. Elsevier Science Publishers, New York, 1990
12. 12. Wolfram D. Applied informetrics for information retrieval research. New Direction in Information Management no. 36. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. 2003
13. 13. Ellegaard O, Wallin, JA. The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: how great is the impact? Scientometrics. 2015;105:1809–31.
14. 14. Bar-Ilan J. Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century-A review. Journal of Informetrics. 2008;2:1–52.
15. 15. Bar-Ilan J. Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2010;82:495–506.
16. 16. Pritchard A. Statistical Bibliography or Bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation. 1969;25:348-9.
17. 17. Li J, Burnham JF, Lemley T, Britton RM. Citation analysis: Comparison of Web of Science, Scopus, SciFinder, and Google Scholar. Journal of electronic resources in medical libraries. 2010:7:196–217.
18. 18. Glynn RW, Chin JZ, Kerin MJ, Sweeney KJ. Representation of cancer in the medical literature a bibliometric analysis. PloS ONE. 2010;5:e13902.
19. 19. Michalopoulos A, Falagas ME. A bibliometric analysis of global research production in respiratory medicine. Chest. 2005;128:3993–8.
20. 20. Ramos JM, Padilla S, Masia M, Gutierrez F. A bibliometric analysis of tuberculosis research indexed in PubMed, 1997–2006. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2008;12:1461-8.
21. 21. Sweileh WM, AbuTaha AS, Sawalha AF, Al-Khalil S, Al-Jabi SW, Zyoud SH. Bibliometric analysis of worldwide publications on multi-, extensively, and totally drug—resistant tuberculosis (2006–2015). Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine. 2016;11:45.
22. 22. Ye H, Li QF, Kasanga M, Lin DJ. Bibliometric analysis of tuberculosis pleurisy based on web of science. Biomedical Research-India. 2017;28:3322-7.
23. 23. Soteriades ES, Falagas ME. A bibliometric analysis in the fields of preventive medicine, occupational and environmental medicine, epidemiology, and public health. BMC Public Health. 2006;6:301.
24. 24. Badenhorst A, Mansoori P, Chan KY. Assessing global, regional, national and sub-national capacity for public health research: a bibliometric analysis of the Web of Science (TM) in 1996–2010. J Glob Health. 2016;6:010504.
25. 25. Duesbery NS, Webb CP, Leppla SH, Gordon VM, Klimpel KR, Copeland TD, et al. Proteolytic inactivation of MAP-kinase-kinase by anthrax lethal factor. Science. 1998;280(5364):734-7.
26. 26. Broadus RN. Toward a definition of ‘bibliometrics’. Scientometrics. 1987;12:373-79.
27. 27. Muslu Ü. The evolution of breast reduction publications: A bibliometric analysis. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2018;42:679-91.
28. 28. Sternbach G. The history of anthrax. J Emerg Med. 2003;24:463-7.
29. 29. Edmonds J, Lindquist HD, Sabol J, Martinez K, Shadomy S, Cymet T, et al. Multigeneration Cross-Contamination of Mail with Bacillus anthracis Spores. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0152225.
30. 30. Williams M, Sizemore DC. Biologic, Chemical, and Radiation Terrorism Review. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2018-2018 Oct 27.
31. 31. Hugh-Jones M, Blackburn J. The ecology of Bacillus anthracis. Mol Aspects Med. 2009;30:356-67.
32. 32. Shadomy SV, Idrissi AE, Raizman E, Bruni M, Palamara E, Pittiglio C, et al. Anthrax outbreaks: a warning for improved prevention, control and heightened awareness. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2016 [cited 2017 Jun 23]. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6124e.pdf
33. 33. https://www.who.int/csr/disease/Anthrax/en/
34. 34. Szava-Kovats E. Unfounded attribution of the “half-life” index-number of literature obsolescence to Burton and Kebler: A literature science study. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2002;53:1098-105.
35. 35. Umstatter W, Rehm M, Dorogi Z. The Half Lifein Scientific Literature. Nachr Dok. 1982;33:50-2.
36. 36. Sevinc A. Web of science: a unique method of cited reference searching. J Natl Med Assoc. 2004;96:980-3.
37. 37. Van Eck NJ, Waltman L, Dekker R, Van den Berg JA comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2010;61:2405-16.
38. 38. Waltman L, Van Eck NJ, Noyons ECM. A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. J Informetr. 2010;4:629-35.