IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0021404.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic Impact of a Public Electronic Health Database: Bibliometric Analysis of Studies Using the General Practice Research Database

Author

Listed:
  • Yu-Chun Chen
  • Jau-Ching Wu
  • Ingo Haschler
  • Azeem Majeed
  • Tzeng-Ji Chen
  • Thomas Wetter

Abstract

Background: Studies that use electronic health databases as research material are getting popular but the influence of a single electronic health database had not been well investigated yet. The United Kingdom's General Practice Research Database (GPRD) is one of the few electronic health databases publicly available to academic researchers. This study analyzed studies that used GPRD to demonstrate the scientific production and academic impact by a single public health database. Methodology and Findings: A total of 749 studies published between 1995 and 2009 with ‘General Practice Research Database’ as their topics, defined as GPRD studies, were extracted from Web of Science. By the end of 2009, the GPRD had attracted 1251 authors from 22 countries and been used extensively in 749 studies published in 193 journals across 58 study fields. Each GPRD study was cited 2.7 times by successive studies. Moreover, the total number of GPRD studies increased rapidly, and it is expected to reach 1500 by 2015, twice the number accumulated till the end of 2009. Since 17 of the most prolific authors (1.4% of all authors) contributed nearly half (47.9%) of GPRD studies, success in conducting GPRD studies may accumulate. The GPRD was used mainly in, but not limited to, the three study fields of “Pharmacology and Pharmacy”, “General and Internal Medicine”, and “Public, Environmental and Occupational Health”. The UK and United States were the two most active regions of GPRD studies. One-third of GRPD studies were internationally co-authored. Conclusions: A public electronic health database such as the GPRD will promote scientific production in many ways. Data owners of electronic health databases at a national level should consider how to reduce access barriers and to make data more available for research.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu-Chun Chen & Jau-Ching Wu & Ingo Haschler & Azeem Majeed & Tzeng-Ji Chen & Thomas Wetter, 2011. "Academic Impact of a Public Electronic Health Database: Bibliometric Analysis of Studies Using the General Practice Research Database," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-7, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0021404
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0021404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021404
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021404&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0021404?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu-Chun Chen & Hsiao-Yun Yeh & Jau-Ching Wu & Ingo Haschler & Tzeng-Ji Chen & Thomas Wetter, 2011. "Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database: administrative health care database as study object in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 365-380, February.
    2. Tjeerd-Pieter van Staa & Hubert G Leufkens & Bill Zhang & Liam Smeeth, 2009. "A Comparison of Cost Effectiveness Using Data from Randomized Trials or Actual Clinical Practice: Selective Cox-2 Inhibitors as an Example," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-10, December.
    3. 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)

    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. 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.
    2. Liang-Chung Huang & Wu-Fu Chung & Shih-Wei Liu & Jau-Ching Wu & Li-Fu Chen & Yu-Chun Chen, 2019. "Characteristics of Non-Emergent Visits in Emergency Departments: Profiles and Longitudinal Pattern Changes in Taiwan, 2000–2010," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-16, June.
    3. Ruhua Huang & Yuting Huang & Fan Qi & Leyi Shi & Baiyang Li & Wei Yu, 2022. "Exploring the characteristics of special issues: distribution, topicality, and citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5233-5256, September.
    4. Craig Aaen-Stockdale, 2017. "Selfish Memes: An Update of Richard Dawkins’ Bibliometric Analysis of Key Papers in Sociobiology," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-9, May.
    5. Antonio Fernández-Cano & Manuel Torralbo & Mónica Vallejo, 2012. "Time series of scientific growth in Spanish doctoral theses (1848–2009)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 15-36, April.
    6. Yuxin Zhu & Zheyu Wang & David Newman‐Toker, 2023. "Misdiagnosis‐related harm quantification through mixture models and harm measures," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2633-2648, September.
    7. Galt, Ryan E. & Pinzón, Natalia & Robinson, Nicholas Ian & Baukloh Coronil, Marcela Beatriz, 2024. "Agroecology and the social sciences: A half-century systematic review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Daniele Fanelli, 2012. "Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 891-904, March.
    11. Mark J. McCabe & Christopher M. Snyder, 2018. "Open Access as a Crude Solution to a Hold‐Up Problem in the Two‐Sided Market for Academic Journals," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 301-349, June.
    12. Sebastian Vogl & Thomas Scherndl & Anton Kühberger, 2018. "#Psychology: a bibliometric analysis of psychological literature in the online media," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1253-1269, June.
    13. João M. Fernandes, 2014. "Authorship trends in software engineering," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 257-271, October.
    14. Laetitia H. M. Schmitt & Hilary M. Graham & Piran C. L. White, 2016. "Economic Evaluations of the Health Impacts of Weather-Related Extreme Events: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
    15. Soo Jeung Lee & Christian Schneijderberg & Yangson Kim & Isabel Steinhardt, 2021. "Have Academics’ Citation Patterns Changed in Response to the Rise of World University Rankings? A Test Using First-Citation Speeds," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Vanessa Ioannoni & Tommaso Vitale & Corrado Costa & Iris Elliott, 2020. "Depicting communities of Romani studies: on the who, when and where of Roma related scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1473-1490, March.
    17. Beáta Gavurová & Martina Halásková & Samuel Koróny, 2019. "Research and Development Indicators of EU28 Countries from Viewpoint of Super-efficiency DEA Analysis," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 225-242.
    18. Fahimnia, Behnam & Sarkis, Joseph & Davarzani, Hoda, 2015. "Green supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 101-114.
    19. Gil-Clavel, Sofia & Wagenblast, Thorid & Filatova, Tatiana, 2023. "Farmers’ Incremental and Transformational Climate Change Adaptation in Different Regions: A Natural Language Processing Comparative Literature Review," SocArXiv 3dp5e, Center for Open Science.
    20. Xin Gu & Karen Blackmore, 2017. "Quantitative study on Australian academic science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1009-1035, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0021404. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.