2017Anesthesia & AnalgesiaRequires access

Analysis of Production, Impact, and Scientific Collaboration on Difficult Airway Through the Web of Science and Scopus (1981–2013)

Miguel Ángel García-Aroca, Andrés Pandiella Dominique, R. Navarro Suay, Adolfo Alonso‐Arroyo, José Ignacio de Granda‐Orive, Francisca Anguita Rodríguez, Andrés López-García

Open publisher page 20 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bibliometrics, the statistical analysis of written publications, is an increasingly popular approach to the assessment of scientific activity. Bibliometrics allows researchers to assess the impact of a field, or research area, and has been used to make decisions regarding research funding. Through bibliometric analysis, we hypothesized that a bibliometric analysis of difficult airway research would demonstrate a growth in authors and articles over time. METHODS: Using the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases, we conducted a search of published manuscripts on the difficult airway from January 1981 to December 2013. After removal of duplicates, we identified 2412 articles. We then analyzed the articles as a group to assess indicators of productivity, collaboration, and impact over this time period. RESULTS: We found an increase in productivity over the study period, with 37 manuscripts published between 1981 and 1990, and 1268 between 2001 and 2010 (P < .001). The difficult airway papers growth rate was bigger than that of anesthesiology research in general, with CAGR (cumulative average growth rate) since 1999 for difficult airway >9% for both WoS and Scopus, and CAGR for anesthesiology as a whole =0.64% in WoS, and =3.30% in Scopus. Furthermore, we found a positive correlation between the number of papers published per author and the number of coauthored manuscripts (P < .001). We also found an increase in the number of coauthored manuscripts, in international cooperation between institutions, and in the number of citations for each manuscript. For any author, we also identified a positive relationship between the number of citations per manuscript and the number of papers published (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: We found a greater increase over time in the number of difficult airway manuscripts than for anesthesiology research overall. We found that collaboration between authors increases their impact, and that an increase in collaboration increases citation rates. Publishing in English and in certain journals, and collaborating with certain authors and institutions, increases the visibility of manuscripts published on this subject.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Bibliometrics, the statistical analysis of written publications, is an increasingly popular approach to the assessment of scientific activity. Bibliometrics allows researchers to assess the impact of a field, or research area, and has been used to make decisions regarding research funding. Through bibliometric analysis, we hypothesized that a bibliometric analysis of difficult airway research would demonstrate a growth in authors and articles over time. METHODS: Using the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases, we conducted a search of published manuscripts on the difficult airway from January 1981 to December 2013. After removal of duplicates, we identified 2412 articles. We then analyzed the articles as a group to assess indicators of productivity, collaboration, and impact over this time period. RESULTS: We found an increase in productivity over the study period, with 37 manuscripts published between 1981 and 1990, and 1268 between 2001 and 2010 (P < .001). The difficult airway papers growth rate was bigger than that of anesthesiology research in general, with CAGR (cumulative average growth rate) since 1999 for difficult airway >9% for both WoS and Scopus, and CAGR for anesthesiology as a whole =0.64% in WoS, and =3.30% in Scopus. Furthermore, we found a positive correlation between the number of papers published per author and the number of coauthored manuscripts (P < .001). We also found an increase in the number of coauthored manuscripts, in international cooperation between institutions, and in the number of citations for each manuscript. For any author, we also identified a positive relationship between the number of citations per manuscript and the number of papers published (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: We found a greater increase over time in the number of difficult airway manuscripts than for anesthesiology research overall. We found that collaboration between authors increases their impact, and that an increase in collaboration increases citation rates. Publishing in English and in certain journals, and collaborating with certain authors and institutions, increases the visibility of manuscripts published on this subject.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 20 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Bibliometrics, the statistical analysis of written publications, is an increasingly popular approach to the assessment of scientific activity. Bibliometrics allows researchers to assess the impact of a field, or research area, and has been used to make decisions regarding research funding. Through bibliometric analysis, we hypothesized that a bibliometric analysis of difficult airway research would demonstrate a growth in authors and articles over time. METHODS: Using the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases, we conducted a search of published manuscripts on the difficult airway from January 1981 to December 2013. After removal of duplicates, we identified 2412 articles. We then analyzed the articles as a group to assess indicators of productivity, collaboration, and impact over this time period. RESULTS: We found an increase in productivity over the study period, with 37 manuscripts published between 1981 and 1990, and 1268 between 2001 and 2010 (P < .001). The difficult airway papers growth rate was bigger than that of anesthesiology research in general, with CAGR (cumulative average growth rate) since 1999 for difficult airway >9% for both WoS and Scopus, and CAGR for anesthesiology as a whole =0.64% in WoS, and =3.30% in Scopus. Furthermore, we found a positive correlation between the number of papers published per author and the number of coauthored manuscripts (P < .001). We also found an increase in the number of coauthored manuscripts, in international cooperation between institutions, and in the number of citations for each manuscript. For any author, we also identified a positive relationship between the number of citations per manuscript and the number of papers published (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: We found a greater increase over time in the number of difficult airway manuscripts than for anesthesiology research overall. We found that collaboration between authors increases their impact, and that an increase in collaboration increases citation rates. Publishing in English and in certain journals, and collaborating with certain authors and institutions, increases the visibility of manuscripts published on this subject.

Key concepts: Scopus, Bibliometrics, Web of science, Medicine, Impact factor, Productivity, Scientometrics, Citation impact

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Analysis of Production, Impact, and Scientific Collaboration on Difficult Airway Through the Web of Science and Scopus (1981–2013) — Research Paper | ScholarLens