A bibliometric Overview and visualization of Koomesh Journal from 2006 to 2022

authors:

avatar Leila Nemati-Anaraki , avatar Ali Ouchi , * , avatar Maedeh Pourmojdegani

Koomesh: Vol.25, issue 4; 535-549
published online: December 05, 2023
article type: Research Article
received: May 01, 2023
accepted: November 05, 2023

how to cite: Nemati-Anaraki L, Ouchi A, Pourmojdegani M. A bibliometric Overview and visualization of Koomesh Journal from 2006 to 2022. koomesh. 2023;25(4):e152853. 

Abstract

Introduction: The Koomesh Journal, a pioneering and influential medical research publication in Iran, has been active since 2006. This study aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the journal's publication structure from 2006 to 2022 using bibliometric analysis. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted with a bibliometric approach. The study population consists of 1238 documents published in the Koomesh Journal. The bibliographic data of these documents were extracted from the Scopus database, and various bibliometric techniques and tools, such as Excel 365, SPSS 26, VOS Viewer, CorTex, and Biblioshiny, were extracted to examine trends and significant topics such as the journal's publication and citation structure, highly cited articles, authors, institutions, and countries. Results: Koomesh experienced fluctuations in productivity and impact before declining. Semnan University of Medical Sciences and Iran were the institutions and countries with the highest participation rates, respectively. Raheb Ghorbani emerged as the most influential and prolific author. The article "Estimation of natural age of menopause in Iranian women: A meta-analysis study" received the most citations. A considerable degree of co-authorship existed among the journal's top authors, with the most collaboration occurring between Iran and Sweden and, in terms of cities, Tehran and Semnan. The terms Iran, sports, and anxiety were the most prevalent and significant. The most discussion was on precision medicine and COVID-19. Conclusion: This study has provided an overview of the publication structure of Koomesh Journal during the years 2006 to 2022. This study may be useful for the editorial board of the journal, because it provides numerous and useful information for the progress and continuation of the work.

References

  • 1.

    Sugimoto CR, Weingart S. The kaleidoscope of disciplinarity. J Documentation 2015; 71: 775-794.##https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2014-0082.

  • 2.

    Raadschelders JC, Lee KH. Trends in the study of public administration: Empirical and qualitative observations from Public Administration Review, 2000-2009. Public Admi Rev 2011; 71: 19-33.##https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02303.x.

  • 3.

    Rashidi A, Mohtashami A, Nazari H, Eftekhari F. Investing the rate of visibility of Urmia medical journal articles in scopus compared with other medical journals of northwest medical universities of Iran. Stud Med Sci 2016; 27: 811-824. (Persian).

  • 4.

    V s. Scientometrics and new cognitive science 2011-2012. N Cogn Sci 2003; 5: 89-92.

  • 5.

    Sengupta I. Bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics and librametrics: an overview. Libri 1992; 42: 75-98.##https://doi.org/10.1515/libr.1992.42.2.75.

  • 6.

    Garfield E. From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software. J Informetrics 2009; 3: 173-179.

  • 7.

    Chen C, McCain K, White H, Lin X. Mapping Scientometrics (1981-2001). Proc Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 2002; 39: 25-34.

  • 8.

    Broadus RN. Toward a definition of "bibliometrics". Scientometrics 1987; 12: 373-379.##https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016680.

  • 9.

    Coup T. Revealed performances: Worldwide rankings of economists and economics departments, 1990-2000. J Eur Econ Assoc 2003; 1: 1309-1345.##https://doi.org/10.1162/154247603322752557.

  • 10.

    Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP, Bachrach DG. Scholarly influence in the field of management: A bibliometric analysis of the determinants of university and author impact in the management literature in the past quarter century. J Manage 2008; 34: 641-720.##https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308319533.

  • 11.

    Cobo MJ, Martnez M-, Gutirrez-Salcedo M, Fujita H, Herrera-Viedma E. 25 years at knowledge-based systems: a bibliometric analysis. Knowledge Based Syst 2015; 80: 3-13.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2014.12.035.

  • 12.

    Merig JM, Mas-Tur A, Roig-Tierno N, Ribeiro-Soriano D. A bibliometric overview of the Journal of Business Research between 1973 and 2014. J Busines Res 2015; 68: 2645-2653.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.006.

  • 13.

    akr MP, Acartrk C, Alaehir O, ilingir C. A comparative analysis of global and national university ranking systems. Scientometrics 2015; 103: 813-848.##https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1586-6.

  • 14.

    Bonilla CA, Merig JM, Torres-Abad C. Economics in Latin America: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 2015; 105: 1239-1252.##https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1747-7.

  • 15.

    Okhovati M, Sadeghi H, Talebian A, Baneshi M. Citation analysis mapping library & information science in WOS citation database 1993-2011. Quart J Knowledge Stud 2013; 6: 9-22.

  • 16.

    Thelwall M. Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science? J Informetrics 2018; 12: 430-435.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.006.

  • 17.

    Casadevall A, Bertuzzi S, Buchmeier MJ, Davis RJ, Drake H, Fang FC, et al. ASM Journals eliminate impact factor information from Journal Websites. MBio 2016; 7: e01150-1116.

  • 18.

    Ranjan CK. Bibliometric Indices of Scientific Journals: Time to overcome the obsession and think beyond the Impact Factor. Med J Armed Forces India 2017; 73: 175-177.

  • 19.

    Moosavi SS, Farshid R, Jafari Baghi Abadi S. The role of medical and health archives in scientific research from a scientometrics perspective. Iran J Med Microbiol 2021; 15: 508-536.##https://doi.org/10.30699/ijmm.15.5.508.

  • 20.

    Akbari M, Delbari Ragheb F, Zolfaghari A, Kalanaki A, Razi S. Designing knowledge map of entrepreneurship in Iran based on Iran's Persian scientific researches. Organiz Cult Manage 2016; 13: 1091-1112.

  • 21.

    Makkizadeh F, Sa'adat F. Bibliometric and thematic analysis of articles in the field of infertility (2011-2015). Int J Reproduct Bio Med 2017; 15: 719-728.##https://doi.org/10.29252/ijrm.15.11.719.

  • 22.

    Serenko A. Meta-analysis of scientometric research of knowledge management: Discovering the identity of the discipline. J Knowledge Manage 2013; 17.##https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-05-2013-0166.

  • 23.

    Zhang H, Gao Y, Fu G, Liu J, Jiao Q. Trends and hotspots for European journal of medicinal Chemistry: a bibliometric study. Eur J Med Chem 2023; 247: 115041.

  • 24.

    Carey LB, Kumar S, Goyal K, Ali F. A bibliometric analysis of the journal of religion and health: Sixty years of publication (1961-2021). J Religion Health 2023; 1-31.

  • 25.

    Yang LC, Liu FH, Liu CM, Yu CH, Chang YC. Bibliometric analysis of top-cited articles in Journal of Dental Sciences. J Dental Sci 2023; 18: 338-344.

  • 26.

    Wiseman SM, Leong R, Lee D, Nabata K. Bibliometric analysis of the classic cited papers in the American journal of surgery: Citation recapitulates surgical history. Am J Surg 2023.

  • 27.

    Mayta-Tovalino F, Quispe-Vicua C, Cabanillas-Lazo M, Munive-Degregori A, Guerrero ME, Mendoza R. A bibliometric analysis of the international dental Journal (2011-2020). Int Dental J 2023; 73: 157-162.

  • 28.

    Alhajj MN, Halboub E, Al-Maweri SA, Alkheraif AA, Smran A, Alqerban A, et al. Bibliometric analysis and evaluation of the Journal of Prosthodontic Research from 2009 to 2021. J Prosthod Res 2022; 66: 525-529.

  • 29.

    Glnzel W, Moed H. Journal Impact Measures in Bibliometric Research. Scientometrics 2002; 53: 171-193.##https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014848323806.

  • 30.

    Sugimoto CR, Ahn YY, Smith E, Macaluso B, Larivire V. Factors affecting sex-related reporting in medical research: a cross-disciplinary bibliometric analysis. Lancet (London, England). 2019; 393: 550-559.##https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32995-7.

  • 31.

    Marefat R, Saberi M, Abdolmajid A, Zoodranj M. A survey on collaboration rate of authors in presenting scientific papers in Koomesh journal during 1999-2010. Koomesh 2012; 13: 279-286. (Persian).

  • 32.

    Saberi MK, Sahebi S, Zerehsaz M. Visualization of the Koomesh journal between 2006 and 2017: A bibliometric study. Koomesh 1398; 22: 1-9. (Persian)##https://doi.org/10.29252/koomesh.22.1.1.

  • 33.

    Kawamura M, Thomas CD, Tsurumoto A, Sasahara H, Kawaguchi Y. Lotka's law and productivity index of authors in a scientific journal. J Oral Sci 2000; 42: 75-78.

  • 34.

    Van Eck N, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. scientometrics 2010; 84: 523-538.

  • 35.

    Reyes NJ, Geronimo FK, Guerra HB, Kim LH. Bibliometric analysis and comprehensive review of stormwater treatment wetlands: global research trends and existing Knowledge Gaps. Sustainability 2023; 15: 2332.##https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032332.

  • 36.

    Aria M, Cuccurullo C. bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informet 2017; 11: 959-975.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.

  • 37.

    Massimo A, Corrado C. Bilionshiny biliomertrix. 2020.

  • 38.

    Svensson G. SSCI and its impact factors: a "prisoner's dilemma"? Eur J Market 2010; 44: 23-33.##https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561011008583.

  • 39.

    Lei XT, Xu QY. Evolution and thematic changes of Journal of King Saud University-science between 2009 and 2019: A bibliometric and visualized review. J King Saud Univ Sci 2020; 32: 2074-2080.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2020.02.006.

  • 40.

    Tur-Porcar A, Mas-Tur A, Merig JM, Roig-Tierno N, Watt J. A bibliometric history of the journal of psychology between 1936 and 2015. J Psychology 2018; 152: 199-225.

  • 41.

    Saberi MK, Sahebi S, Zerehsaz M. Visualization of the Koomesh journal between 2006 and 2017: A bibliometric study. Koomesh 2020; 22: 1-9. (Persian)##https://doi.org/10.29252/koomesh.22.1.1.

  • 42.

    Tang M, Bever JD, Yu FH. Open access increases citations of papers in ecology. Ecosphere 2017; 8: e01887.##https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1887.

  • 43.

    Ale Ebrahim N, Salehi H, Embi MA, Habibi F, Gholizadeh H, Motahar SM, et al. Effective strategies for increasing citation frequency. Int Educ Studi 2013; 6: 93-99.##https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n11p93.

  • 44.

    Costas R, Zahedi Z, Wouters P. Do "altmetrics" correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol 2015; 66: 2003-2019.##https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23309.

  • 45.

    Kolahi J, Khazaei S, Iranmanesh P, Kim J, Bang H, Khademi A. Meta-Analysis of correlations between altmetric attention score and citations in health sciences. Bio Med Res Int 2021; 2021.

  • 46.

    Chang J, Desai N, Gosain A. Correlation between altmetric score and citations in pediatric surgery core journals. J Surg Res 2019; 243: 52-58.

  • 47.

    Nocera AP, Boyd CJ, Boudreau H, Hakim O, Rais-Bahrami S. Examining the correlation between altmetric score and citations in the urology literature. Urology 2019; 134: 45-50.

  • 48.

    Ouchi A, Saberi MK, Ansari N, Hashempour L, Isfandyari-Moghaddam A. Do altmetrics correlate with citations? A study based on the 1,000 most-cited articles. Inform Discov Deliver 2019; 47: 192-202.##https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-07-2019-0050.

  • 49.

    Saberi MK, Mokhtari H, Ouchi A, Vakilimofrad H. An Altmetrics Analysis of the Articles Published in the Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran (1987-2020). Med J Islamic Repub Iran 2021; 35: 1296-1305.

  • 50.

    Tao Z, Zhou S, Yao R-q, Wen K, Da W, Meng Y, et al. COVID-19 will stimulate a new coronavirus research breakthrough: a 20-year bibliometric analysis. Ann Translat Med 2020; 8: 528.

  • 51.

    Haunschild R, Bornmann L. How many scientific papers are mentioned in policy-related documents? An empirical investigation using Web of Science and Altmetric data. Scientometrics 2017; 110: 1209-1216.

  • 52.

    Baladi ZH, Umedani LV. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences: A bibliometric assessment 2001-2010. Pakistan J Med Sci 2017; 33: 714-719.

  • 53.

    Shehatta I, Mahmood K. Research collaboration in Saudi Arabia 1980-2014: Bibliometric patterns and national policy to foster research quantity and quality. Libri 2016; 66: 13-29.##https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2015-0095.

  • 54.

    Abramo G, D'Angelo CA. The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy. J Informetrics 2015; 9: 746-761.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.003.

  • 55.

    Huang MH, Wu LL, Wu YC. A study of research collaboration in the preweb and postweb stages: A coauthorship analysis of the information systems discipline. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol 2015; 66: 778-797.##https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23196.

  • 56.

    Mokhnacheva YV. The influence of various forms of co-authorship on the scientific productivity of Russian scientists in the field of molecular biology. Sci Technic Inform Proc 2015; 42: 162-172.##https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688215030090.

  • 57.

    Baker HK, Kumar S, Goyal K, Sharma A. International review of financial analysis: A retrospective evaluation between 1992 and 2020. Int Rev Financ Anal 2021; 78: 101946.##https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101946.

  • 58.

    Kumar S, Lim WM, Pandey N, Christopher Westland J. 20 years of electronic commerce research. Electron Commerce Res 2021; 21: 1-40.

  • 59.

    Acedo FJ, Barroso C, Casanueva C, Galn JL. Coauthorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. J Manage Studi 2006; 43: 957-983.##https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00625.x.

  • 60.

    Baker HK, Kumar S, Pandey N. A bibliometric analysis of European financial managements first 25 years. Eur Financ Manage 2020; 26: 1224-160.##https://doi.org/10.1111/eufm.12286.

  • 61.

    Ibanez A, Bielza C, Larranaga P. Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations: a case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000-2009. Scientometrics 2013; 95: 689-716.##https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0883-6.

  • 62.

    Rajaeefard A, Mohammad-Beigi A, Mohammad-Salehi N. Estimation of natural age of menopause in Iranian women: A meta-analysis study. Koomesh 2011; 13: 1-7. (Persian).

  • 63.

    Schubert A, Glnzel W. Cross-national preference in co-authorship, references and citations. Scientometrics 2006; 69: 409-428.##https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0160-7.

  • 64.

    Bardeesi AM, Jamjoom AA, Sharab MA, Jamjoom AB. Impact of country self citation on the ranking of the top 50 countries in clinical neurology. Eneurologicalsci 2021; 23: 100333.

  • 65.

    Xiao Z, Qin Y, Xu Z, Antucheviciene J, Zavadskas EK. The journal buildings: A bibliometric analysis (2011-2021). Buildings 2022; 12: 37.##https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12010037.

  • 66.

    Sharma P, Singh R, Tamang M, Singh AK, Singh AK. Journal of teaching in travel &tourism: a bibliometric analysis. J Teach Travel Tourism 2021; 21: 155-176.##https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2020.1845283.

  • 67.

    "Elaine" Tian Y, "Andy" Lee H, Law R. A comparison of research topics in leading tourism journals. Int J Tourism Sci 2011; 11: 108-126.##https://doi.org/10.1080/15980634.2011.11434649.

  • 68.

    Singh R, Sibi P, Sharma P, Tamang M, Singh AK. Twenty years of journal of quality assurance in hospitality & tourism: A bibliometric assessment. J Quality Assur Hosp Tourism 2022; 23: 482-507.##https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2021.1884931.

  • 69.

    Mulet-Forteza C, Genovart-Balaguer J, Merig JM, Mauleon-Mendez E. Bibliometric structure of IJCHM in its 30 years. Int J Contem Hosp Manage 2019; 31: 4574-4604##https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2018-0828.