IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p15630-d983072.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Productivity among Filipino Neurologists Associated with Socioeconomic, Healthcare, and Disease Burden Factors: A Bibliometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Almira Doreen Abigail O. Apor

    (Department of Neurosciences, College of Medicine and Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila 1000, Philippines
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Roland Dominic G. Jamora

    (Department of Neurosciences, College of Medicine and Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila 1000, Philippines
    Institute for Neurosciences, St. Luke’s Medical Center Global City, Taguig City 1634, Philippines
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Philippine research productivity in neurology has not been fully characterized. We investigated the research output of adult and child neurologists in the Philippines and correlated this to the Philippine socioeconomic and healthcare indices among different regions. We used electronic databases to retrieve studies published by Filipino neurologists using the 2022 Philippine Neurological Association website as reference. We included all studies published until December 2021. Official government region-specific socioeconomic indices were used. Correlational analysis was completed on bibliometric indices and collected data. We retrieved 746 articles from 274 of 526 Filipino neurologists which were published in 245 publications over 45 years with 12,409 citations. The National Capital Region (NCR) had the most publications ( n = 662, 88.7%) and citations ( n = 10,377, 83.6%). Research productivity was positively correlated with population, gross domestic product (GDP), health expenditure, number of healthcare establishments, neurologists, and research personnel. The Philippine research landscape is dominated by articles of neurologists belonging to institutions in the NCR, which has the greatest number of neurologists, training institutions, and highest GDP. There is a need to address the disparity seen in other regions to bridge gaps in healthcare, health human resources, and health information through research.

Suggested Citation

  • Almira Doreen Abigail O. Apor & Roland Dominic G. Jamora, 2022. "Research Productivity among Filipino Neurologists Associated with Socioeconomic, Healthcare, and Disease Burden Factors: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15630-:d:983072
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15630/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15630/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Adams, 2012. "The rise of research networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 490(7420), pages 335-336, October.
    2. Sultan Ayoub Meo & Abeer A Al Masri & Adnan Mahmood Usmani & Almas Naeem Memon & Syed Ziauddin Zaidi, 2013. "Impact of GDP, Spending on R&D, Number of Universities and Scientific Journals on Research Publications among Asian Countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-8, June.
    3. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    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. Lutz Bornmann, 2020. "Bibliometrics-based decision tree (BBDT) for deciding whether two universities in the Leiden ranking differ substantially in their performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1255-1258, February.
    2. Bornmann, Lutz & Stefaner, Moritz & de Moya Anegón, Felix & Mutz, Rüdiger, 2016. "Excellence networks in science: A Web-based application based on Bayesian multilevel logistic regression (BMLR) for the identification of institutions collaborating successfully," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 312-327.
    3. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    4. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    5. Michaela Strinzel & Josh Brown & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner & Sarah Rijcke & Michael Hill, 2021. "Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-4, December.
    6. Maria Lourdes Ordoñez Olivo & Zoltán Lakner, 2023. "Shaping the Knowledge Base of Bioeconomy Sectors Development in Latin American and Caribbean Countries: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Sten F Odenwald, 2020. "A citation study of earth science projects in citizen science," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, July.
    8. Alexander Kalgin & Olga Kalgina & Anna Lebedeva, 2019. "Publication Metrics as a Tool for Measuring Research Productivity and Their Relation to Motivation," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    9. Gregorio González-Alcaide, 2021. "Bibliometric studies outside the information science and library science field: uncontainable or uncontrollable?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6837-6870, August.
    10. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    11. Ulrike Gretzel & Matthias Fuchs & Rodolfo Baggio & Wolfram Hoepken & Rob Law & Julia Neidhardt & Juho Pesonen & Markus Zanker & Zheng Xiang, 2020. "e-Tourism beyond COVID-19: a call for transformative research," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 187-203, June.
    12. Zuo, Zhiya & Zhao, Kang, 2018. "The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 736-756.
    13. Joost Kosten, 2016. "A classification of the use of research indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 457-464, July.
    14. Svein Kyvik & Ingvild Reymert, 2017. "Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 951-967, November.
    15. Jeffrey Demaine, 2022. "Fractionalization of research impact reveals global trends in university collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2235-2247, May.
    16. Daniela De Filippo & Fernanda Morillo & Borja González-Albo, 2023. "Measuring the Impact and Influence of Scientific Activity in the Humanities and Social Sciences," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, June.
    17. Frederique Bordignon, 2020. "Self-correction of science: a comparative study of negative citations and post-publication peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1225-1239, August.
    18. Peter Sjögårde & Fereshteh Didegah, 2022. "The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1903-1921, April.
    19. Marco Cozzi, 2020. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    20. Flora M A Colledge & Bernice S Elger & David M Shaw, 2013. "“Conferring Authorship”: Biobank Stakeholders’ Experiences with Publication Credit in Collaborative Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-1, September.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15630-:d:983072. 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.