A global bibliometric analysis of Plesiomonas-related research (1990 – 2017)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plesiomonas shigelloides is an emerging pathogen with damaging effects on human health such as gastroenteritis and extraintestinal infections. Here, we carried out a bibliometric survey that aimed to examine publication trends in Plesiomonas-related research by time and place, international collaborative works, identify gaps and suggest directions for future research. The search term "Plesiomonas shigelloides" was used to retrieve articles published between 1990 and 2017 from the Web of Science database. Only primary research articles were included in the analysis. A total of 155 articles were published within the survey period, with an average of 5.54±2.66 articles per year and an annual growth rate of -0.8%. Research output peaked in 2000 and 2006 (each accounting for 7.7% of the total). The United States ranked first in terms of numbers of articles (n = 29, 18.1%) and total citations (n = 451). Cameroon, Canada, Cuba, Switzerland and Turkey co-shared the 10th position each with 2 articles (1.3%). Research collaboration was low (collaboration index = 3. 32). In addition to Plesiomonas shigelloides (n = 82, 52.9%), the top Authors Keywords and research focus included lipopolysaccharide and nuclear magnetic resonance (n = 13, 8.4%). Diarrhea (n = 43, 27.7%), Aeromonas species (n = 41, 26.5%) and infections (n = 31, 20.0%) were also highly represented in Keywords-Plus. Authors' collaborations and coupling networks formed two mega-clusters which nodes were shared solely by authors from high-income countries. The common conceptual framework in retrieved articles determined by K-means clustering revealed three clusters with sizes of 7, 16, and 29, representing research responses focused on extraintestinal and gastroenteritis, P. shigelloides lipopolysaccharide structure, and co-infections, respectively. Our bibliometric analysis revealed a global diminishing research in Plesiomonas; greater research outcomes from high-income countries compared to others and low collaboration with developing 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
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.152 | 0.204 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".