Measuring the research productivity on environmental toxicology: A scientometric study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper attempts to highlight the growth and development of Environmental Toxicology literature and to make the quantitative and qualitative assessment by way of analyzing various facets of research output and Citations impact based on the Web of Science database. A total of 6,663 publications were published on Environmental Toxicology, which received 183279 Citations in 2022. There were 126 countries involved in the Environmental Toxicology research. The most productive countries are the USA, having the highest share of 3,051 publications and receiving 105322 Citations, followed by the People’s Republic of China with 653 Citations with 13660 publications, Germany with 594 Citations for 21,315 publications, Canada with 575 Citations for 19,869 publications, England with 568 Citations for 24408 publications and so on. The most productive Institutions were the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) with 459 publications (17879 Citations), followed by USEPA with 65 publications (3822 Citations), and NIH National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences NIEHS 54 publications (3257citations); it noted that 6 Institutes were registered more than 20 Publications and 25 Institutions were recorded more than 1000 Citations. The highly Cited journals are Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry with 10425 Citations for 577 Publications, Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) with 1436 Citations for 220 publications; Environmental Health Perspectives, with 1476 Citations for 162 publications; Environmental Health Perspectives, with 5332 Citations for 195 publications, and Toxicological Sciences with 729 Citations for 187 publications. The study found that 10 source titles were registered in more than 600 Citations, and most of the publications are published in high-impact journals. This paper also reveals the collaborating institutions, countries, authorship and publication pattern.In the journal, Current Computer-aided Drug Design entitled “Quantitative Structure-activity Relationships of Aquatic Narcosis,” Adhikari and Mishra explores the quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) of aquatic narcosis and offer a comprehensive review of the field. Also, this article has a Local Citation Score of 2, a Global Citation Score of 11, a Local Citation Rank of 3. It has been cited 191 times, highlighting its influence and relevance in the area of drug design and environmental toxicology.Also, in another journal, the International Journal of Environmental Health Research, entitled “Cellular Mechanisms of Cadmium-Induced Toxicity: A Review,” Rani et al. explain the cellular mechanisms involved in cadmium-induced toxicity by providing an in-depth analysis of how cadmium affects biological systems Further this article has a local citation score (LCS) of 2, a Global Citation Score of 11, LCS of 3, and has been cited 191 times, highlighting its influence and relevance in the area of drug design and environmental toxicology.Hence, it is identified that India ranks 17th position and has 157 publications in environmental toxicology that are covered by internationally reputed indexing sources
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,056 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».