IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v85y2010i2d10.1007_s11192-010-0166-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intellectual structure of biomedical informatics reflected in scholarly events

Author

Listed:
  • Senator Jeong

    (Seoul National University)

  • Hong-Gee Kim

    (Seoul National University)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper was to analyze the intellectual structure of biomedical informatics reflected in scholarly events such as conferences, workshops, symposia, and seminars. As analysis variables, ‘call for paper topics’, ‘session titles’ and author keywords from biomedical informatics-related scholarly events, and the MeSH descriptors were combined. As analysis cases, the titles and abstracts of 12,536 papers presented at five medical informatics (MI) and six bioinformatics (BI) global scale scholarly event series during the years 1999–2008 were collected. Then, n-gram terms (MI = 6,958; BI = 5,436) from the paper corpus were extracted and the term co-occurrence network was analyzed. One hundred important topics for each medical informatics and bioinformatics were identified through the hub-authority metric, and their usage contexts were compared with the k-nearest neighbor measure. To research trends, newly popular topics by 2-year period units were observed. In the past 10 years the most important topic in MI has been “decision support”, while in BI “gene expression”. Though the two communities share several methodologies, according to our analysis, they do not use them in the same context. This evidence suggests that MI uses technologies for the improvement of productivity in clinical settings, while BI uses algorithms as its tools for scientific biological discovery. Though MI and BI are arguably separate research fields, their topics are increasingly intertwined, and the gap between the fields blurred, forming a broad informatics—namely biomedical informatics. Using scholarly events as data sources for domain analysis is the closest way to approximate the forefront of biomedical informatics.

Suggested Citation

  • Senator Jeong & Hong-Gee Kim, 2010. "Intellectual structure of biomedical informatics reflected in scholarly events," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 541-551, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:85:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0166-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0166-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-010-0166-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-010-0166-z?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. Johannes Stegmann & Guenter Grohmann, 2003. "Hypothesis generation guided by co-word clustering," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 56(1), pages 111-135, January.
    2. Wolfgang Glänzel & Balázs Schlemmer & András Schubert & Bart Thijs, 2006. "Proceedings literature as additional data source for bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 457-473, September.
    3. Senator Jeong & Sungin Lee & Hong‐Gee Kim, 2009. "Are you an invited speaker? A bibliometric analysis of elite groups for scholarly events in bioinformatics," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(6), pages 1118-1131, June.
    4. Ed Noyons, 2001. "Bibliometric mapping of science in a policy context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(1), pages 83-98, January.
    5. David Fenstermacher, 2005. "Introduction to bioinformatics," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 56(5), pages 440-446, March.
    6. Katherine W. McCain, 1995. "Biotechnology in context: A database‐filtering approach to identifying core and productive non‐core journals supporting multidisciplinary R & D," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 46(4), pages 306-317, May.
    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. Said Fathalla & Sahar Vahdati & Christoph Lange & Sören Auer, 2020. "Scholarly event characteristics in four fields of science: a metrics-based analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 677-705, May.
    2. H. Martinez & A. Jaime & J. Camacho, 2014. "Biotechnology profile analysis in Colombia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1789-1804, December.
    3. Hao Wang & Sanhong Deng & Xinning Su, 2016. "A study on construction and analysis of discipline knowledge structure of Chinese LIS based on CSSCI," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1725-1759, December.

    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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    3. Chris W. Belter, 2013. "A bibliometric analysis of NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 629-644, May.
    4. González-Albo, Borja & Bordons, María, 2011. "Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 369-381.
    5. Persson, Olle, 2010. "Identifying research themes with weighted direct citation links," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 415-422.
    6. Félix Moya-Anegón & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Victor Herrero-Solana & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Elena Corera-Álvarez & Francisco J. Munoz-Fernández, 2004. "A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the cocitation of classes and categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(1), pages 129-145, September.
    7. José Luis Ortega Priego, 2003. "A Vector Space Model as a methodological approach to the Triple Helix dimensionality: A comparative study of Biology and Biomedicine Centres of two European National Research Councils from a Webometri," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 429-443, October.
    8. João M. Fernandes & Paulo Cortez, 2020. "Alphabetic order of authors in scholarly publications: a bibliometric study for 27 scientific fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2773-2792, December.
    9. Hanna-Mari Puuska, 2010. "Effects of scholar’s gender and professional position on publishing productivity in different publication types. Analysis of a Finnish university," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 419-437, February.
    10. Wenjia Zhu & Jiancheng Guan, 2013. "A bibliometric study of service innovation research: based on complex network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1195-1216, March.
    11. Daniele Rotolo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2014. "Matching MEDLINE/PubMed Data with Web of Science (WOS): A Routine in R language," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Min Song & Su Yeon Kim, 2013. "Detecting the knowledge structure of bioinformatics by mining full-text collections," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 183-201, July.
    13. Wei Du & Raymond Yiu Keung Lau & Jian Ma & Wei Xu, 2015. "A multi-faceted method for science classification schemes (SCSs) mapping in networking scientific resources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2035-2056, December.
    14. Matthew Francisco & Staša Milojevic & Selma Šabanovic, 2011. "Conference Models to Bridge Micro and Macro Studies of Science," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13.
    15. Gaston Heimeriks & Ron Boschma, 2014. "The path- and place-dependent nature of scientific knowledge production in biotech 1986–2008," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 339-364.
    16. Danielle H. Lee, 2019. "Predictive power of conference-related factors on citation rates of conference papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 281-304, January.
    17. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    18. Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Carolin Michels & Jun-Ying Fu, 2014. "Systematic analysis of coverage and usage of conference proceedings in web of science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 307-327, August.
    20. Aghaei Chadegani, Arezoo & Salehi, Hadi & Md Yunus, Melor & Farhadi, Hadi & Fooladi, Masood & Farhadi, Maryam & Ale Ebrahim, Nader, 2013. "A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases," MPRA Paper 46898, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Mar 2013.

    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:spr:scient:v:85:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0166-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.