MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383225068 · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2023.1217727

A bibliometric analysis of the global impact of metaproteomics research

2023· article· en· W4383225068 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
AbdulAziz Ascandari, Suleiman Aminu, Nour El Houda Safdi, Achraf El Allali, Rachid Daoud

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaproteomicsScopusBibliometricsWeb of scienceCitationLibrary scienceScientometricsPolitical scienceData scienceBiologyComputer scienceMEDLINEMetagenomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Metaproteomics is a subfield in meta-omics that is used to characterize the proteome of a microbial community. Despite its importance and the plethora of publications in different research area, scientists struggle to fully comprehend its functional impact on the study of microbiomes. In this study, bibliometric analyses are used to evaluate the current state of metaproteomic research globally as well as evaluate the specific contribution of Africa to this burgeoning research area. In this study, we use bibliometric analyses to evaluate the current state of metaproteomic research globally, identify research frontiers and hotspots, and further predict future trends in metaproteomics. The specific contribution of Africa to this research area was evaluated. Methods: Relevant documents from 2004 to 2022 were extracted from the Scopus database. The documents were subjected to bibliometric analyses and visualization using VOS viewer and Biblioshiny package in R. Factors such as the trends in publication, country and institutional cooperation networks, leading scientific journals, author's productivity, and keywords analyses were conducted. The African publications were ranked using Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) scores. Results: had the highest number of total publications (62). The United States of America (USA), Germany, China, and Canada, together with other European countries were the most productive. Institution-wise, the Helmholtz Zentrum für Umweltforschung, Germany had more publications while Max Plank Institute had the highest total collaborative link strength. Jehmlich N. was the most productive author whereas Hettich RL had the highest h-index of 63. Regarding Africa, only 2.2% of the overall publications were from the continent with more publication outputs from South Africa. More than half of the publications from the continent had an FWCI score ≥ 1. Conclusion: The scientific outputs of metaproteomics are rapidly evolving with developed countries leading the way. Although Africa showed prospects for future progress, this could only be accelerated by providing funding, increased collaborations, and mentorship programs.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0130.100
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MicrobiologySame topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesFrench-language works237,207