MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223542744 · doi:10.33263/lianbs121.027

A Bibliometric Analysis of Moderna mRNA-1273 Vaccine for COVID-19

2022· article· en· W4223542744 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLetters in Applied NanoBioScience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthModernaSchool of Medicine, Emory UniversityInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleImperial College LondonVanderbilt University Medical CenterVanderbilt UniversityMcMaster UniversityIrving Medical Center, Columbia UniversityEmory UniversityBrigham and Women's Hospital
KeywordsScopusLibrary scienceIndex (typography)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BibliometricsMedicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Family medicineMEDLINEGeographyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawWorld Wide WebInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We performed the 1st bibliometric analysis of the Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine (for COVID-19). On May 28, 2021, the data was retrieved from the Scopus database. In total, two hundred and three (n=203) documents are published about Moderna, majorly comprising of reviews (n=84) and articles (n=66). In all documents (reviews and articles only), 1110 authors have significantly contributed. The documents per author were 0.135, while authors per document were 7.4. The collaborative Index (CI) was 8.34. By Lotka's Law, we provided information about the frequency of authors. For example, 1021 authors were involved in one (n=1) publication. The total number of publications, h-index, m-index, g-index, and total citations for all authors are provided. The highest documents are published by the National Institutes of Health NIH (n-8) & Moderna Therapeutics (n=8 and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases NIAID (n=7). Fifty-five (n=55) countries have significantly contributed to all publications. The highest documents are published by the United States (n=74), India (n=30), and the United Kingdom (n=16). By Biblioshiny, the co-authorship network is also presented. All documents are published in 118 different sources, majorly in Vaccines (n=6), Frontiers in Immunology (n=5), and New England Journal Of Medicine (n=4). We also provided the H-index, g-index, and m-index of all sources. The top ten (n-10) most cited documents are briefly discussed, while we provided a general overview of the publications by co-words analysis. On December 18, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Moderna COVID-19 (mRNA-1273) vaccine.

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
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0820.238
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLetters in Applied NanoBioScienceSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207