IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v9y2015i3p592-617.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of factors contributing to PubMed's growth

Author

Listed:
  • Vardakas, Konstantinos Z.
  • Tsopanakis, Grigorios
  • Poulopoulou, Alexandra
  • Falagas, Matthew E.

Abstract

We studied the factors (recent and older journals, publication types, electronic or print form, open or subscription access, funding, affiliation, language and home country of publisher) that contributed to the growth of literature in Biomedical and Life Sciences as reflected in PubMed in the period 2004–2013. Only records indexed as journal articles were studied. 7364,633 journal articles were added in PubMed between 2004 and 2013 (48.9% increase from 2003). Recently launched journals showed the greater increase in published articles, but older journals contributed the greater number of articles. The observed growth was mainly attributed to articles to which no other PubMed publication type was assigned. Articles available in both print and electronic form increased substantially (61.1%). Both open (80.8%) and subscription access (54.7%) articles increased significantly. Funding from non-US government sources also contributed significantly (74.5%). Asian (114%) and European (34.9%) first author affiliation increased at a higher rate than American publications (7.9%). English remained the predominant language of publications. USA- and England-based organizations published a gradually increasing body of literature. Open access, non-US government funding and Asian origin of the first author were the factors contributing to literature growth as depicted in PubMed. A better assignment of publication types is required.

Suggested Citation

  • Vardakas, Konstantinos Z. & Tsopanakis, Grigorios & Poulopoulou, Alexandra & Falagas, Matthew E., 2015. "An analysis of factors contributing to PubMed's growth," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 592-617.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:9:y:2015:i:3:p:592-617
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.06.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175115771500053X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2015.06.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John P A Ioannidis, 2005. "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-1, August.
    2. Marcin Kozak & Lutz Bornmann & Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "How have the Eastern European countries of the former Warsaw Pact developed since 1990? A bibliometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1101-1117, February.
    3. Andreas Lundh & Marija Barbateskovic & Asbjørn Hróbjartsson & Peter C Gøtzsche, 2010. "Conflicts of Interest at Medical Journals: The Influence of Industry-Supported Randomised Trials on Journal Impact Factors and Revenue – Cohort Study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-7, October.
    4. Craig, Iain D. & Plume, Andrew M. & McVeigh, Marie E. & Pringle, James & Amin, Mayur, 2007. "Do open access articles have greater citation impact?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 239-248.
    5. Politimi Eleni Valkimadi & Drosos E. Karageorgopoulos & Harissios Vliagoftis & Matthew E. Falagas, 2009. "Increasing dominance of English in publications archived by PubMed," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 219-223, October.
    6. Peder Olesen Larsen & Markus Ins, 2010. "The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 575-603, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rongying Zhao & Xinlai Li & Zhisen Liang & Danyang Li, 2019. "Development strategy and collaboration preference in S&T of enterprises based on funded papers: a case study of Google," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 323-347, October.
    2. Christophe Boudry & Ghislaine Chartron, 2017. "Availability of digital object identifiers in publications archived by PubMed," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1453-1469, March.
    3. Margarita Kyriakidou & Aigli Kyriakoudi & Nikolaos A. Triarides & Konstantinos Z. Vardakas & Matthew E. Falagas, 2018. "Biomedical research productivity and economic crisis in Greece: a 22-year study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1559-1564, September.
    4. Zhao, Star X. & Tan, Alice M. & Yu, Shuang & Xu, Xin, 2018. "Analyzing the research funding in physics: The perspective of production and collaboration at institution level," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 508(C), pages 662-674.
    5. Star X. Zhao & Shuang Yu & Alice M. Tan & Xin Xu & Haiyan Yu, 2016. "Global pattern of science funding in economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 463-479, October.
    6. Ekaterina V. Ilgisonis & Mikhail A. Pyatnitskiy & Svetlana N. Tarbeeva & Artem A. Aldushin & Elena A. Ponomarenko, 2022. "How to catch trends using MeSH terms analysis?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1953-1967, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniele Fanelli, 2012. "Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 891-904, March.
    2. David Pontille & Didier Torny, 2013. "Behind the scenes of scientific articles: defining categories of fraud and regulating cases," CSI Working Papers Series 031, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
    3. Ádám Kun, 2018. "Publish and Who Should Perish: You or Science?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-16, April.
    4. David A Groneberg, 2018. "Social sciences research in the Central European city of Wrocław: A density-equalizing mapping analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Simon Spedding, 2016. "Open Access Publishing of Health Research: Does Open Access Publishing Facilitate the Translation of Research into Health Policy and Practice?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, January.
    6. Jyotirmoy Sarkar, 2018. "Will P†Value Triumph over Abuses and Attacks?," Biostatistics and Biometrics Open Access Journal, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 7(4), pages 66-71, July.
    7. Tuan V. Nguyen & Ly T. Pham, 2011. "Scientific output and its relationship to knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 107-117, October.
    8. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
    9. Mark J. McCabe & Christopher M. Snyder, 2015. "Does Online Availability Increase Citations? Theory and Evidence from a Panel of Economics and Business Journals," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(1), pages 144-165, March.
    10. Jelte M Wicherts & Marjan Bakker & Dylan Molenaar, 2011. "Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-7, November.
    11. Frederique Bordignon, 2020. "Self-correction of science: a comparative study of negative citations and post-publication peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1225-1239, August.
    12. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    13. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2015. "Do Natural Field Experiments Afford Researchers More or Less Control than Laboratory Experiments? A Simple Model," NBER Working Papers 20877, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Aurelie Seguin & Wolfgang Forstmeier, 2012. "No Band Color Effects on Male Courtship Rate or Body Mass in the Zebra Finch: Four Experiments and a Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-11, June.
    15. Marie-Violaine Tatry & Dominique Fournier & Benoît Jeannequin & Françoise Dosba, 2014. "EU27 and USA leadership in fruit and vegetable research: a bibliometric study from 2000 to 2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 2207-2222, March.
    16. Dragana Radicic & Geoffrey Pugh & Hugo Hollanders & René Wintjes & Jon Fairburn, 2016. "The impact of innovation support programs on small and medium enterprises innovation in traditional manufacturing industries: An evaluation for seven European Union regions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1425-1452, December.
    17. Colin F. Camerer & Anna Dreber & Felix Holzmeister & Teck-Hua Ho & Jürgen Huber & Magnus Johannesson & Michael Kirchler & Gideon Nave & Brian A. Nosek & Thomas Pfeiffer & Adam Altmejd & Nick Buttrick , 2018. "Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 637-644, September.
    18. Li, Lunzheng & Maniadis, Zacharias & Sedikides, Constantine, 2021. "Anchoring in Economics: A Meta-Analysis of Studies on Willingness-To-Pay and Willingness-To-Accept," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    19. Grant Lewison & Richard Sullivan, 2015. "Conflicts of interest statements on biomedical papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2151-2159, March.
    20. Ju Wen & Lei Lei, 2022. "Adjectives and adverbs in life sciences across 50 years: implications for emotions and readability in academic texts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4731-4749, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:9:y:2015:i:3:p:592-617. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.