MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390740991 · doi:10.7759/cureus.52085

Cleft Lip and Palate Research Trends in Saudi Arabia: A Bibliometric Analysis

2024· article· en· W4390740991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hatem Hazzaa Hamadallah, Khalid N Alturki, Mahmoud Alsulaimani, Ahmad A. Othman, Abdulaziz O Altamimi

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCleft Lip and Palate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)BibliometricsLibrary scienceMedicineWeb of scienceMEDLINEMedical educationPolitical scienceGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Saudi Arabia advances in medical education and patient care, assessing its contribution to cleft lip and palate (CLP) research is vital. This bibliometric analysis aims to map the trends, collaborations, and impact of Saudi research in CLP. Utilizing the Web of Science database, this study conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of CLP research related to Saudi Arabian publications. The analysis included data extraction and assessment of publications, citations, H-index, and international collaborations using advanced bibliometric tools and software. A total of 89 CLP-related articles in Saudi Arabia were retrieved. The findings indicated a steady increase in publications and citations over the years, reflecting growing interest and recognition of CLP's challenges in the Saudi healthcare context. King Abdulaziz University and King Saud University emerged as leading contributors. International collaboration was evident, with significant partnerships with countries like the USA, Canada, the UK, and others. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal and the Saudi Dental Journal were identified as the most influential journals in disseminating Saudi CLP research. The study highlights a positive growth trajectory in Saudi CLP research, marked by increased publications, citations, and international collaborations. It underscores the importance of continuous research and the need for enhanced efforts to further the understanding and treatment of CLP. Future studies should consider including a broader range of databases to provide a more comprehensive global view of CLP research trends.

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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0300.089
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicCleft Lip and Palate ResearchFrench-language works237,207