How the Scientific Community Responded to the Covid-19 Pandemic: A Subject-Level Timetrend Bibliometric Analysis Publisher Pubmed



Malekpour MR¹ ; Abbasikangevari M^{1, 2} ; Azadnajafabad S¹ ; Ghamari SH^{1, 2} ; Rezaei N^{1, 3} ; Rezazadehkhadem S¹ ; Rezaei N^{1, 3} ; Aminorroaya A¹ ; Abdolhamidi E¹ ; Fateh SM^{1, 3} ; Haghshenas R¹ ; Roshani S¹ ; Ahmadi N¹ ; Jamshidi K¹ Show All Authors Show Affiliations
Source: PLoS ONE Published:2021

Abstract

Background COVID-19 has triggered an avalanche of research publications, the various aspects of which need to be assessed. The objective of this study is to determine the scientific community's response patterns to COVID-19 through a bibliometric analysis of the time-trends, global contribution, international collaboration, open-access provision, science domains of focus, and the behavior of journals. Methods The bibliographic records on COVID-19 literature were retrieved from both PubMed and Scopus. The period for searching was set from November 1, 2019, to April 15, 2021. The bibliographic data were coupled with COVID-19 incidence to explore possible association, as well as World Bank indicators and classification of economies. Results A total of 159132 records were included in the study. Following the escalation of incidences of COVID-19 in late 2020 and early 2021, the monthly publication count made a new peak in March 2021 at 20505. Overall, 125155 (78.6%) were national, 22548 (14.2%) were binational, and 11429 (7.2%) were multi-national. Low-income countries with 928 (66.8%) international publications had the highest percentage of international. The open-access provision decreased from 85.5% in February 2020 to 62.0% in April 2021. As many as 82841 (70.8%) publications were related to health sciences, followed by life sciences 27031 (23.1%), social sciences 20291 (17.3%), and physical sciences 15141 (12.9%). The top three medical subjects in publications were general internal medicine, public health, and infectious diseases with 28.9%, 18.3%, and 12.6% of medical publications, respectively. Conclusions The association between the incidence and publication count indicated the scientific community's interest in the ongoing situation and timely response to it. Only one-fifth of publications resulted from international collaboration, which might lead to redundancy without adding significant value. Our study underscores the necessity of policies for attraction of international collaboration and direction of vital funds toward domains of higher priority. © 2021 Malekpour et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.