There are many types of bibliometrics analysis, so can you tell us more about what you want to do and what your goals are?

Hi David L Morgan ,

Thank you for your reply. Much appreciated.

The bibliometric analysis will be conducted for a specific sub-field within the medical field. I want to know what has been published in this sub-field. So, I guess the norm is to analyse the top authors, journals, etc.

On the above note, you mentioned there are many types of bibliometric analysis. Please help to elaborate on this, as I was unaware.

If you know of best practices in general for bibliometric analysis studies, including: (i) the different types of these studies; (ii) what types of papers to include (for example, original articles, reviews, etc?); and (iii) ways of analysing the data, it will be most appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

Classic forms of bibliometric analysis include citation and co-citation analysis. It sounds to me like you may be doing something more like a traditional literature review than a bibliometric analysis.

The selection of papers for bibliometric analysis is similar to selection of papers for a literature review. In my bibliometric analysis published in a peer-reviewed journal, I used the following criteria:

"Publications must be peer-reviewed.

& Publications must include at least one of the keywords learning analytics, learning and knowledge analytics, or educational data mining.

& Publications from SoLAR, as well as from the Educational Data Mining society were excluded from analysis in order to focus on interdisciplinary research.

& Must have been published between 2011 and 2018. 2011 was chosen as the beginning year because it was this year that SoLAR was formed and the field of learning analytics was more properly codified.

& Indexed under the Web of Science category Education Educational Research.

& Publications also had to have been cited 10 or more times to be included. This cutoff is admittedly arbitrary, because no rational could be found in the literature for a specific cutoff, and whether or not a paper is considered highly cited is relative to the field. Ten was chosen as an arbitrary cutoff because: (a) it allowed for inclusion of only influential research likely to be considered by outside researchers; and (b) the limited size allowed for an optimal clustering method not possible with larger data sets due to computational limits. Another limitation of this cutoff is that it favors older publications, as they have had more time to accrue citations. However, it was decided that it was imprudent to extrapolate citations for younger papers and potentially include papers that would ultimately not be highly cited."

You can find the paper here if you'd like an example. I also cite several other bibliometric analyses you may find useful.

http://drgawdat.edutech-portal.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Phillips-Ozogul2020_Article_LearningAnalyticsResearchInRel.pdf

Hi,

The sample in a medical analysis depends on the purpose of the study. If it is a review paper of the field, or subfield, than every item published on the subject should be included, every type of material. If the analysis is an observation of the state of the art of the field, than mostly recent papers that are cited should be included in the sample .In the medical profession there is a possibility of quantitative, statistical review of clinical results.

The co citations tests in a discipline are good for observing the emergence of a new subfield within a discipline.

It must include only peer-reviewed documents to ascertain the quality of the research.

Thanks, all, for your reply. Much and truly appreciated.

Do you think that the papers to be included in the bibliometric analysis, should have a criteria that the papers must have the full text? So to read the full text to ascertain whether the paper meets the search term used? Thoughts?

Also, if you're getting data for papers from multiple databases, for example, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, etc, what is the best way to do the analysis for the bibliometric analysis? I know that the challenge is the data format is potentially not consistent across the databases. However, one would need to consolidate the results from all databases used in some way (I'm thinking if one uses one file type as export for all databases, if possible), then, remove duplicates, and then do the analysis from there. To consolidate and remove duplicates, EndNote or RefWorks could be used, however, after this step, what is the best way to move forward and do the bibliometric analysis please?

Here is an article that describes some of the basics. In general, you begin by downloading references into a program like EndNote and removing duplicates. If you intend to do a co-citation analysis, be sure download the references.

Hi,

It must include peer-reviewed papers, which published in valuable journals, this will help your work to spread wider.

Thank you!

I'm trying to get papers from multiple databases, for example, Scopus, Web of Science, etc.

However, I am a bit stuck, because there is no uniform way to incorporate all this data into one. From what I saw, the databases have a .RIS format file as common... but then, the data in that file seems to not include the references of a paper, etc, and so I'm unsure how to do for example, the co-citation analysis, etc.

I know that it's easier to do a bibliometric analysis with one database only. I have done so before.

But right now, trying to do one with multiple databases due to more coverage. And the above is the challenge I face.

Thanks for the .PDF article, @David.

Will go through it and see. Much appreciated!

Good morning

If you review articles you can find a clear methodology to use in that methodology.

I send you one paper

Best regards

Ph.D. Ingrid del Valle García Carreño

Must include authentic documents, peer reviewed journal publications

You can go through my latest study titled, "Mapping the field of knowledge management: a bibliometric analysis using R".

Hi Zakia,

here is an example of systematic approach applied to the field of knowledge management. I hope that it helps.

Meliha

Zakia,

if you will use bibliometrix R package, here are some suggestions.

https://www.bibliometrix.org/faq.html

Hi there,

I believe you should include peer-reviewed articles and to defend the articles used, you must use those articles which are from high ranking journals. In order to do that, you can check the ABS journal ranking list to find and get higher ranking articles. Also there is a link for the ABS journal ranking which is here Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted

Hope this helps.

Best of Luck

I agree with Zaman Javed but will add: If you are conducting a scoping review, the gray literature and nonpeer reviewed can and should be included. In a traditional study? It all depends on your aims; for example, if you are looking for peer reviewed or studies which meet certain standards, then the gray literature would be unacceptable.

David Coker

I think, it is not good to include such publication, because, the meta-data of these gray articles may not be available in the correct format in bibliographic databases (WoS, Scopus...).

Any good bibliometric study is to have high-quality data to have reliable, accurate results.

Here is one of my latest papers on bibliometric analysis.

Thanks, everyone for the replies. Much and truly appreciated!