MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1859296017 · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-6-301

A bibliometric analysis in the fields of preventive medicine, occupational and environmental medicine, epidemiology, and public health

2006· article· en· W1859296017 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elpidoforos S. Soteriades, Matthew E. Falagas

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthBiostatisticsEpidemiologyMedicinePreventive healthcareEnvironmental medicineEnvironmental epidemiologyEnvironmental healthBibliometricsOccupational medicinePopulationFamily medicineLibrary sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Research in the fields of Preventive Medicine, Occupational/Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology and Public Health play an important role in the advancement of knowledge. In order to map the research production around the world we performed a bibliometric analysis in the above fields. METHODS: All articles published by different world regions in the above mentioned scientific fields and cited in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) database of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) during the period 1995 and 2003, were evaluated. The research production of different world regions was adjusted for: a) the gross domestic product in 1995 US dollars, and b) the population size of each region. RESULTS: A total of 48,861 articles were retrieved and categorized. The USA led the research production in all three subcategories. The percentage of articles published by USA researchers was 43%, 44% and 61% in the Preventive Medicine, Epidemiology, and Public Health subcategories, respectively. Canada and Western Europe shared the second position in the first two subcategories, while Oceania researchers ranked second in the field of Public Health. CONCLUSION: USA researchers maintain a leadership position in the production of scientific articles in the fields of Preventive Medicine, Occupational/Environmental Medicine and Epidemiology, at a level similar to other scientific disciplines, while USA contribution to science in the field of Public Health is by all means outstanding. Less developed regions would need to support their researchers in the above fields in order to improve scientific production and advancement of knowledge in their countries.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.2070.261
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.568
GPT teacher head0.575
Teacher spread0.007 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Bibliometrics

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207