Department of Emergency Medicine, Chi-Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan.
Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Chi-Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Nov 4;101(44):e31335. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031335.
BACKGROUND: An individual's research domain (RD) can be determined from objective publication data (e.g., medical subject headings and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms) by performing social network analysis. Bibliographic coupling (such as cocitation) is a similarity metric that relies on citation analysis to determine the similarity in RD between 2 articles. This study compared RD consistency between articles as well as their cited references and citing articles (ARCs). METHODS: A total of 1388 abstracts were downloaded from PubMed and authored by 3 productive authors. Based on the top 3 clusters in social network analysis, similarity in RD was observed by comparing their consistency using the major MeSH terms in author articles, cited references and citing articles (ARC). Impact beam plots with La indices were drawn and compared for each of the 3 authors. RESULTS: Sung-Ho Jang (South Korea), Chia-Hung Kao (Taiwan), and Chin-Hsiao Tseng (Taiwan) published 445, 780, and 163 articles, respectively. Dr Jang's RD is physiology, and Dr Kao and Dr Tseng's RDs are epidemiology. We confirmed the consistency of the RD terms by comparing the major MeSH terms in the ARC. Their La indexes were 5, 5, and 6, where a higher value indicates more extraordinary research achievement. CONCLUSION: RD consistency was confirmed by comparing the main MeSH terms in ARC. The 3 approaches of RD determination (based on author articles, the La index, and the impact beam plots) were recommended for bibliographical studies in the future.
背景：可以通过执行社会网络分析，从客观的出版物数据（例如，医学主题词和主题词表 (MeSH) 术语）中确定个人的研究领域 (RD)。文献耦合（例如共引）是一种相似性度量，它依赖于引文分析来确定两篇文章之间 RD 的相似性。本研究比较了文章及其引用参考文献和引用文章 (ARC) 之间的 RD 一致性。
方法：从 PubMed 下载了总共 1388 篇摘要，这些摘要由 3 位高产作者撰写。基于社会网络分析中的前 3 个聚类，通过比较主要 MeSH 术语在作者文章、引用参考文献和引用文章 (ARC) 中的一致性，观察 RD 的相似性。为每位作者绘制了具有 La 指数的影响梁图并进行了比较。
结果：韩国的 Sung-Ho Jang、中国台湾的 Chia-Hung Kao 和中国台湾的 Chin-Hsiao Tseng 分别发表了 445、780 和 163 篇文章。Jang 博士的 RD 是生理学，而 Kao 博士和 Tseng 博士的 RD 是流行病学。我们通过比较 ARC 中的主要 MeSH 术语来确认 RD 术语的一致性。他们的 La 指数分别为 5、5 和 6，其中更高的值表示更卓越的研究成果。
结论：通过比较 ARC 中的主要 MeSH 术语，确认了 RD 的一致性。未来的文献研究推荐使用 3 种 RD 确定方法（基于作者文章、La 指数和影响梁图）。
Zotero 插件
