Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews

Abstract

Systematic scientometric reviews, empowered by computational and visual analytic approaches, offer opportunities to improve the timeliness, accessibility, and reproducibility of studies of the literature of a field of research. On the other hand, effectively and adequately identifying the most representative body of scholarly publications as the basis of subsequent analyses remains a common bottleneck in the current practice. What can we do to reduce the risk of missing something potentially significant? How can we compare different search strategies in terms of the relevance and specificity of topical areas covered? In this study, we introduce a flexible and generic methodology based on a significant extension of the general conceptual framework of citation indexing for delineating the literature of a research field. The method, through cascading citation expansion, provides a practical connection between studies of science from local and global perspectives. We demonstrate an application of the methodology to the research of literature-based discovery (LBD) and compare five datasets constructed based on three use scenarios and corresponding retrieval strategies, namely a query-based lexical search (one dataset), forward expansions starting from a groundbreaking article of LBD (two datasets), and backward expansions starting from a recently published review article by a prominent expert in LBD (two datasets). We particularly discuss the relevance of areas captured by expansion processes with reference to the query-based scientometric visualization. The method used in this study for comparing bibliometric datasets is applicable to comparative studies of search strategies.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 53

1. 1.

   Price DD. Networks of scientific papers. Science. 1965;149:510–5.

   Not in our library10.1126/science.149.3683.510

2. 2.

   Yang H-T, Ju J-H, Wong Y-T, Shmulevich I, Chiang J-H. Literature-based discovery of new candidates for drug repurposing. Briefings in Bioinformatics. 2017;18(3):488–97.

   Not in our library10.1093/bib/bbw030

3. 3.

   Bruza P, Weeber M. Literature-Based Discovery: Springer; 2008.

   Not in our library

4. 4.

   Choi B-K, Dayaram T, Parikh N, Wilkins AD, Nagarajan M, Novikov IB, et al Literature-based automated discovery of tumor suppressor p53 phosphorylation and inhibition by NEK2. PNAS. 2018;115(42):10666–71.

   Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1806643115

5. 5.

   Sebastian Y, Siew E, Orimaye SO. Emerging approaches in literature-based discovery: techniques and performance review. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 2017;32(e12):1–35.

   Not in our library

6. 6.

   Swanson DR. Fish oil, Raynaud’s syndrome, and undiscovered public knowledge. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 1986;30(1):7–18.

   Not in our library10.1353/pbm.1986.0087

7. 7.

   Swanson DR. Undiscovered public knowledge. Library Quarterly. 1986;56(2):103–18.

   Not in our library

8. 8.

   Cobo MJ, López-Herrera AG, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F. Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2011;62(7):1382–402.

   Not in our library

9. 9.

   Chen C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2006;57(3):359–77.

   Not in our library

10. 10.

    Chen C. Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Data and Information Science. 2017;2(2):1–40.

    Not in our library

11. 11.

    van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523–38.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

12. 12.

    Chen C, Hu Z, Liu S, Tseng H. Emerging trends in regenerative medicine: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. Expert Opinions on Biological Therapy. 2012;12(5):593–608.

    Not in our library10.1517/14712598.2012.674507

13. 13.

    Shen S, Cheng C, Yang J, Yang S. Visualized analysis of developing trends and hot topics in natural disaster research. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):e0191250

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0191250

14. 14.

    Zhang C, Xu T, Feng H, Chen S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Landfills: A Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability. 2019;11(8):2282.

    Not in our library

15. 15.

    Li M, Porter AL, Suominen A. Insights into relationships between disruptive technology/innovation and emerging technology: A bibliometric perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2018;129:285–96.

    Not in our library

16. 16.
    What Is Citizen Science? – A Scientometric Meta-Analysis · 2016

    No notice
17. 17.

    Haunschild R, Bornmann L, Marx W. Climate Change Research in View of Bibliometrics. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0160393

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0160393

18. 18.

    Klavans R, Boyack KW. Using Global Mapping to Create More Accurate Document-Level Maps of Research Fields. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2011;62(1):1–18.

    Not in our library

19. 19.

    Leydesdorff L, Rafols I. A Global Map of Science Based on the ISI Subject Categories. J AM SOC INF SCI TEC. 2009;60(2):348–62.

    Not in our library

20. 20.
    Design and update of a classification system: the UCSD map of science. · 2012

    Not checked
21. 21.

    Chen C. Predictive effects of structural variation on citation counts. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2012;63(3):431–49.

    Not in our library

22. 22.

    Chen C, Song M. Representing Scientific Knowledge: The Role of Uncertainty: Springer; 2017.

    Not in our library

23. 23.

    Garfield E. From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software. Journal of Informetrics. 2009;3(3):173–9.

    Not in our library

24. 24.

    Zitt M, Bassecoulard E. Dlineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences. Information Processing & Management. 2006;42(6):1513–31.

    Not in our library

25. 25.

    Porter AL, Youtie Y, Shapira P, Schoeneck DJ. Refining search terms for nanotechnology. Journal of Nanopartical Research. 2008;10(5):715–28.

    Not in our library

26. 26.

    Kostoff RN, Koytcheff RG, Lau CGY. Technical structure of the global nanoscience and nanotechnology literature. Journal of Nanopartical Research. 2007;9(5):701–24.

    Not in our library

27. 27.

    Huang Y, Schuehle J, Porter AL, Youtie J. A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’. Scientometrics. 2015;105(3):2005–22.

    Not in our library

28. 28.

    Smalheiser N. Rediscovering Don Swanson: the past, present and future of literature-based discovery. Journal of Data and Information Science. 2017;2(4):43–64.

    Not in our library10.1515/jdis-2017-0019

29. 29.

    Swanson DR. 2 MEDICAL LITERATURES THAT ARE LOGICALLY BUT NOT BIBLIOGRAPHICALLY CONNECTED. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1987;38(4):228–33.

    Not in our library

30. 30.

    Swanson DR. MIGRAINE AND MAGNESIUM—11 NEGLECTED CONNECTIONS. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 1988;31(4):526–57.

    Not in our library10.1353/pbm.1988.0009

31. 31.

    Smalheiser NR, Swanson DR. Using ARROWSMITH: a computer-assisted approach to formulating and assessing scientific hypotheses. Comput Meth Programs Biomed. 1998;57(3):149–53.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0169-2607(98)00033-9

32. 32.

    Swanson DR, Smalheiser NR. An interactive system for finding complementary literatures: A stimulus to scientific discovery. Artificial Intelligence. 1997;91(2):183–203.

    Not in our library

33. 33.

    Smalheiser NR, Swanson DR. Linking estrogen to Alzheimer’s disease: An informatics approach. Neurology. 1996;47(3):809–10.

    Not in our library10.1212/wnl.47.3.809

34. 34.

    Weeber M, Klein H, de Jong-van den Berg LTW, Vos R. Using concepts in literature-based discovery: Simulating Swanson’s Raynaud-fish oil and migraine-magnesium discoveries. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2001;52(7):548–57.

    Not in our library

35. 35.

    Gordon MD, Lindsay RK. Toward discovery support systems: A replication, re-examination, and extension of Swanson’s work on literature-based discovery of a connection between Raynaud’s and fish oil. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1996;47(2):116–28.

    Not in our library

36. 36.

    Kim YH, Song M. A context-based ABC model for literature-based discovery. PLoS One. 2019;14(4).

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0215313

37. 37.

    Shneider AM. Four stages of a scientific discipline: four types of scientists. Trends in biochemical sciences. 2009;34(5):217–23.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tibs.2009.02.002

38. 38.

    Klavans R, Boyack KW. Toward a Consensus Map of Science. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2009;60(3):455–76.

    Not in our library

39. 39.

    Chen C, Leydesdorff L. Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2014;62(2):334–51.

    Not in our library

40. 40.

    Chen C. Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101:5303–10.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0307513100

Cited by papers we hold 6

• Bibliometric analysis of the global research status and trends of the association between Vitamin D and infections from 2001 to 2021 · 2022
  Not checked
• Mapping knowledge structure and research trends of knee osteoarthritis with meniscus in two decades: A bibliometric analysis · 2022
  Not checked
• Knowledge domain and hotspots analysis concerning applications of two-photon polymerization in biomedical field: A bibliometric and visualized study · 2022
  Not checked
• Multi-PLI: interpretable multi‐task deep learning model for unifying protein–ligand interaction datasets · 2021
  Not checked
• Knowledge Domain and Emerging Trends in Ferroptosis Research: A Bibliometric and Knowledge-Map Analysis · 2021
  No notice
• Application of Nanoparticles Alleviates Heavy Metals Stress and Promotes Plant Growth: An Overview · 2020
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.