IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v8y2020i1p15-d329014.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinicians’ Publication Output: Self-Report Survey and Bibliometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kurubaran Ganasegeran

    (Clinical Research Center, Seberang Jaya Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Penang 13700, Malaysia)

  • Alan Swee Hock Ch’ng

    (Clinical Research Center, Seberang Jaya Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Penang 13700, Malaysia
    Department of Medicine, Seberang Jaya Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Penang 13700, Malaysia)

  • Mohd Fadzly Amar Jamil

    (Clinical Research Center, Seberang Jaya Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Penang 13700, Malaysia)

  • Irene Looi

    (Clinical Research Center, Seberang Jaya Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Penang 13700, Malaysia
    Department of Medicine, Seberang Jaya Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Penang 13700, Malaysia)

Abstract

The uncertainties around disease management and control measures have not only motivated clinicians to keep abreast of new evidence available in the scholarly literature, but also to be rigorously engaged in medical research, dissemination and knowledge transfer. We aimed to explore clinicians’ publication output from the Malaysian perspective. A self-report survey and bibliometric analysis was conducted. A total of 201/234 clinicians participated in the survey. Items consisted of demographics, researching habits, publication output and level of importance of journal selection metrics. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. Bibliometric analysis using retrieved records from PubMed between 2009 and October 2019 was conducted and co-occurrence and co-authorship analyses were executed. Self-reported publication output was 16.9%. In the logistic regression model, publication output was significantly higher amongst consultants or clinical specialists (aOR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.1–10.0, p = 0.023); clinicians previously involved in research (aOR = 4.2, 95% CI 1.5–11.4, p = 0.004); clinicians who ever used reference citation managers (aOR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.3–7.7, p = 0.010); and journal publication speed (aOR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.2–7.1, p = 0.019). Most clinicians published original research papers (76.4%) in international journals (78.2%). Published papers were mostly observational studies, genetic, stroke and health services or systems research. In conclusion, socio-demographics, researching habits and journal selection metrics were significantly associated with self-reported publication output. Real outputs from bibliometrics were predominantly focused across five clusters.

Suggested Citation

  • Kurubaran Ganasegeran & Alan Swee Hock Ch’ng & Mohd Fadzly Amar Jamil & Irene Looi, 2020. "Clinicians’ Publication Output: Self-Report Survey and Bibliometric Analysis," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:8:y:2020:i:1:p:15-:d:329014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/1/15/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/1/15/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière & Benoît Macaluso & Jean-Pierre Robitaille, 2008. "The Effects of Aging on Researchers' Publication and Citation Patterns," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(12), pages 1-8, December.
    2. Ping Zhou & Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2009. "Regional analysis on Chinese scientific output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 839-857, December.
    3. Williams Nwagwu, 2006. "A bibliometric analysis of productivity patterns of biomedical authors of Nigeria during 1967-2002," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(2), pages 259-269, November.
    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. Kurubaran Ganasegeran & Chee Peng Hor & Mohd Fadzly Amar Jamil & Purnima Devi Suppiah & Juliana Mohd Noor & Norshahida Abdul Hamid & Deik Roy Chuan & Mohd Rizal Abdul Manaf & Alan Swee Hock Ch’ng & Ir, 2021. "Mapping the Scientific Landscape of Diabetes Research in Malaysia (2000–2018): A Systematic Scientometrics Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Nicholas Yee Liang Hing & Xin Ci Wong & Pei Xuan Kuan & Mohan Dass Pathmanathan & Mohd Aizuddin Abdul Rahman & Kalaiarasu M. Peariasamy, 2022. "Scientific Abstract to Full Paper: Publication Rate over a 3-Year Period in a Malaysian Clinical Research Conference," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, October.

    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. Jinyuan Ma & Fan Jiang & Liujian Gu & Xiang Zheng & Xiao Lin & Chuanyi Wang, 2020. "Patterns of the Network of Cross-Border University Research Collaboration in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Staša Milojević, 2012. "How Are Academic Age, Productivity and Collaboration Related to Citing Behavior of Researchers?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Jelnov, Pavel & Weiss, Yoram, 2022. "Influence in economics and aging," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Timur Gareev & Irina Peker, 2023. "Quantity versus quality in publication activity: knowledge production at the regional level," Papers 2311.08830, arXiv.org.
    5. Martorell Cunil, Onofre & Otero González, Luis & Durán Santomil, Pablo & Mulet Forteza, Carlos, 2023. "How to accomplish a highly cited paper in the tourism, leisure and hospitality field," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    6. Liu, Weishu & Hu, Guangyuan & Tang, Li, 2018. "Missing author address information in Web of Science—An explorative study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 985-997.
    7. Feng Zhou & Huai-Cheng Guo & Yuh-Shan Ho & Chao-Zhong Wu, 2007. "Scientometric analysis of geostatistics using multivariate methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 73(3), pages 265-279, December.
    8. Daniel Fink & Youngsun Kwon & Jae Jeung Rho & Minho So, 2014. "S&T knowledge production from 2000 to 2009 in two periphery countries: Brazil and South Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 37-54, April.
    9. S. Hennemann & T. Wang & I. Liefner, 2011. "Measuring regional science networks in China: a comparison of international and domestic bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 535-554, August.
    10. Adam Emmer, 2019. "The careers behind and the impact of solo author articles in Nature and Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 825-840, August.
    11. Aristoklis D. Anastasiadis & Marcelo P. Albuquerque & Marcio P. Albuquerque & Diogo B. Mussi, 2010. "Tsallis q-exponential describes the distribution of scientific citations—a new characterization of the impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 205-218, April.
    12. Daiji Kawaguchi & Ayako Kondo & Keiji Saito, 2016. "Researchers’ career transitions over the life cycle," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1435-1454, December.
    13. Sonia E. Monroy & Hernando Diaz, 2018. "Time series-based bibliometric analysis of the dynamics of scientific production," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1139-1159, June.
    14. Vincent Larivière & Rodrigo Costas, 2016. "How Many Is Too Many? On the Relationship between Research Productivity and Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-10, September.
    15. David Howoldt & Henning Kroll & Peter Neuhäusler & Alexander Feidenheimer, 2023. "Understanding researchers’ Twitter uptake, activity and popularity—an analysis of applied research in Germany," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 325-344, January.
    16. Fredrik Niclas Piro & Dag W. Aksnes & Kristoffer Rørstad, 2013. "A macro analysis of productivity differences across fields: Challenges in the measurement of scientific publishing," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 307-320, February.
    17. Rebecca Long & Aleta Crawford & Michael White & Kimberly Davis, 2009. "Determinants of faculty research productivity in information systems: An empirical analysis of the impact of academic origin and academic affiliation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(2), pages 231-260, February.
    18. Guillaume Cabanac & Gilles Hubert & Béatrice Milard, 2015. "Academic careers in Computer Science: continuance and transience of lifetime co-authorships," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 135-150, January.
    19. Liu, Weishu & Hu, Guangyuan & Tang, Li & Wang, Yuandi, 2015. "China's global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978–2013)," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 555-569.
    20. Balázs Győrffy & Gyöngyi Csuka & Péter Herman & Ádám Török, 2020. "Is there a golden age in publication activity?—an analysis of age-related scholarly performance across all scientific disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1081-1097, 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:gam:jpubli:v:8:y:2020:i:1:p:15-:d:329014. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.