Kazem Khalagi1, Mohammad Javad Mansourzadeh2, Azadeh Aletaha3,4, Hossein Yarmohammadi1,5, Rasha Atlasi6,7, Sepideh Banar8, Noushin Fahimfar1, Firoozeh Hajipour9, Mahnaz Sanjari1, Bagher Larijani9, Afshin Ostovar10. 1. Osteoporosis Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, No. 10, Jalale-al-Ahmad Ave., Tehran, Iran. 2. School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 3. Evidence Based Medicine Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Science Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 4. School of Health Management & Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 5. Medical Students Research Committee, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran. 6. Evidence Based Practice Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 7. Department of Medical Library and Information Science, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 8. School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 9. Endocrinology Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 10. Osteoporosis Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, No. 10, Jalale-al-Ahmad Ave., Tehran, Iran. aostovar@tums.ac.ir.
Abstract
Our purpose was to investigate the co-authorship network of Iranian researchers in the field of osteoporosis. We used 1328 documents retrieved from databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in the analysis. The network had 183 authors in 13 clusters, low cohesion, and slow information flow between its members. PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the pattern and characteristics of cooperation between Iranian researchers in the field of osteoporosis through the co-authorship social network analysis. METHODS: All papers on osteoporosis with at least one Iranian author were retrieved from medical databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from 2009 to 2019. After the removal of duplicates, the title and abstract of the papers were reviewed by two independent reviewers, and screening was performed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data were entered into the BibExecl software, and the different spelling forms in the author names were manually merged. The authors' co-occurrence matrix was then developed and entered into the UCINET software and the cohesion indexes (density, diameter, and average distance) and centrality indexes (degree, betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector) for the co-authorship network were estimated. The institutions and countries of the authors of the entered papers were also used in the network analysis and their socio-graphs were drawn. RESULTS: We used 1328 documents in the analysis. The co-authorship network was constructed only for authors with at least 5 papers. The network had 183 nodes (authors) in 13 clusters. Its density was 0.063 and its number of components was 2. The large component encompassed 95.6% and the small component 4.4% of authors. The average distance in the main component of the network was 3 and its diameter was 6. Larijani B was ranked first in the network in terms of degree, betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector centrality. In terms of the contribution of organizations in osteoporosis publications, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (with 35.5% of papers published in WoS database), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (14.7%), and Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (9.3%) retained in the first to third place, respectively. In papers published on the WoS, most Iranian authors have collaborated with authors from the USA, Belgium, Canada, and the UK respectively. CONCLUSION: The co-authorship network had low cohesion with slow information flow between its members. The collaboration with young researchers by the network's active, efficient, and broker authors will lead to the maintenance and development of the network.
Our purpose was to investigate the co-authorship network of Iranian researchers in the field of osteoporosis. We used 1328 documents retrieved from databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in the analysis. The network had 183 authors in 13 clusters, low cohesion, and slow information flow between its members. PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the pattern and characteristics of cooperation between Iranian researchers in the field of osteoporosis through the co-authorship social network analysis. METHODS: All papers on osteoporosis with at least one Iranian author were retrieved from medical databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from 2009 to 2019. After the removal of duplicates, the title and abstract of the papers were reviewed by two independent reviewers, and screening was performed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data were entered into the BibExecl software, and the different spelling forms in the author names were manually merged. The authors' co-occurrence matrix was then developed and entered into the UCINET software and the cohesion indexes (density, diameter, and average distance) and centrality indexes (degree, betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector) for the co-authorship network were estimated. The institutions and countries of the authors of the entered papers were also used in the network analysis and their socio-graphs were drawn. RESULTS: We used 1328 documents in the analysis. The co-authorship network was constructed only for authors with at least 5 papers. The network had 183 nodes (authors) in 13 clusters. Its density was 0.063 and its number of components was 2. The large component encompassed 95.6% and the small component 4.4% of authors. The average distance in the main component of the network was 3 and its diameter was 6. Larijani B was ranked first in the network in terms of degree, betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector centrality. In terms of the contribution of organizations in osteoporosis publications, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (with 35.5% of papers published in WoS database), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (14.7%), and Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (9.3%) retained in the first to third place, respectively. In papers published on the WoS, most Iranian authors have collaborated with authors from the USA, Belgium, Canada, and the UK respectively. CONCLUSION: The co-authorship network had low cohesion with slow information flow between its members. The collaboration with young researchers by the network's active, efficient, and broker authors will lead to the maintenance and development of the network.
Entities:
Keywords:
Co-authorship; Iran; Osteoporosis; Social network analysis