MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4410137694 · doi:10.4103/sjg.sjg_123_25

Addressing the research gap in IBD and MASLD: Time for coordinated action

2025· article· en· W4410137694 sur OpenAlexaff
Noora H. Alfaraj, Anouar Teriaky, Karim Qumosani

Notice bibliographique

RevueSaudi Journal of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueInflammatory Bowel Disease
Établissements canadiensLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineAction (physics)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) have garnered significant global attention due to their rising prevalence and substantial public health burden. Meta-analyses and large-scale epidemiological studies from North America, Europe, and Asia consistently demonstrate increasing incidence rates of IBD in newly industrialized countries,[1] alongside an escalating burden of MASLD-related cirrhosis and metabolic complications.[2,3] A systematic review further underscores the high prevalence of MASLD among individuals with type 1 diabetes, highlighting the need for improved screening protocols and integrated, multidisciplinary models of care.[4] These international findings underscore persistent global challenges including underdiagnosis, limited awareness, and the absence of robust research networks and funding mechanisms. Benchmarking regional bibliometric trends against global patterns can provide valuable insight for identifying research gaps, setting strategic priorities, and building regional capacity in the Arab world. The rising burden of chronic diseases in the Arab world has profound implications on healthcare systems, research agendas, and public health planning. The analyses published in this issue of the Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology offer timely insights into the state of regional research activity surrounding IBD and MASLD.[5,6] Collectively, these studies reveal substantial discrepancies between disease burden and scholarly output, presenting an opportunity for a strategic and coordinated response. Bibliometric analysis offers a structured approach to evaluate the volume, impact, and evolution of scientific output. By assessing citation patterns, collaboration networks, and funding trends, bibliometric tools help elucidate strengths and deficiencies within research ecosystems. In emerging fields or underrepresented regions such as IBD and MASLD research in the Arab world, these methods are instrumental in aligning academic focus with public health priorities.[7,8] From 2009 to 2023, Arab countries accounted for just 2.9% of global IBD-related publications. Although Saudi Arabia and Egypt were the largest contributors, the overall citation impact of regional publications fell short of international benchmarks (14.49 vs 23.98).[5] Moreover, only 18.7% of IBD-related publications from the region acknowledged funding support, compared to 32.4% globally. Encouragingly, countries with higher IBD incidence, prevalence, and GDP tended to produce more research, indicating partial alignment between disease burden and research activity.[5,7] A parallel pattern is seen in MASLD research. Despite a regional disease prevalence nearly twice the global average,[2,9] Arab institutions contributed only 3.3% of global MASLD publications from 2014 to 2023.[6] Citation impact also did not match global standards (15.7 vs 23.7), and fewer than one in five studies received research funding. Notably, international collaborations were associated with improved citation impact, reaffirming the importance of global partnerships in enhancing research visibility and quality.[6,10] Several shared themes and challenges emerge from these analyses. These include a gap between disease burden and research output, disparities across Arab countries in research output, value of international collaborations, and limited research funding. The prevalence of IBD and MASLD is increasing, yet research investment has not kept pace.[2,9] The underrepresentation or absence of some Arab countries in research output is driven by institutional capacity, access to funding, and research infrastructure.[6,11] International collaborations enhance research quality, methodological rigor, and impact, leading to citation metrics exceeding global averages.[5,6,12] Funding remains a critical constraint with locally funded studies being rare and those that receive financial support more likely to be published in high impact journals and cited more frequently.[6,8,10] Addressing these gaps requires a shift from observation to a prioritization of action grounded in practical, scalable solutions. This requires an increase in dedicated regional and national funding by governments and institutions, which has demonstrated tangible benefits.[6] Research training and capacity must improve by implementing structured mentorship programs, allocating protected time, and offering training in grant writing, scientific publication, and research methodology.[6,7] Policymakers and funders should incentivize the creation of regional and international disease-specific research consortia. These networks can standardize data collection, enable multicenter studies, and foster knowledge exchange across institutions and borders.[5,6,12] We must promote translation of research into policy to better benefit society by collaborating with ministries of health and public health departments.[2,9,13] We should also invest in regional journals to cultivate regional research and build platforms to better highlight that research.[6,8] In conclusion, as the Arab world confronts evolving epidemiological realities, the need for evidence-based health policy and practice becomes increasingly urgent. The bibliometric analyses presented in this issue do more than tally publications; they highlight the pressing need for investment, infrastructure development, and collaboration. Investing in gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary disease research is not just an academic goal, it is a lifeline for millions across the Arab world. By realigning research efforts with disease burden and fostering a more integrated and collaborative research environment, Arab countries can close the gap between scientific output and clinical need, further advancing health outcomes and contributing meaningfully to the global research landscape.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,608
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,224

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,065
Tête enseignante GPT0,369
Écart entre enseignants0,304 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSaudi Journal of GastroenterologyMême sujetInflammatory Bowel DiseaseTravaux en français237 207