Comparison of performances of top emergency medicine journals in terms of COVID-19 publications in 2020

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this study is to evaluate the qualitative and quantitative contribution of Emergency Medicine (EM) journals to scientific literature on COVID-19 and compare the journals in terms of publications.

Material and methods

We performed a comparison of top EM journals by hand-search in terms of COVID-19 publications and citations between January 1st and December 31st, 2020. Publications were also categorized according to research field, country and article types. Data were given as numbers and percentages.

Results

Among 18 EM journals, Resuscitation ranked in the first place and American Journal of Emergency Medicine ranked in the last place according to Impact Factor. In these journals, 512 (12.2%) articles related to COVID-19 were published. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine and Internal and Emergency Medicine published the greatest amount of publications related to COVID-19 ( n = 71). The American Journal of Emergency Medicine was also the leading journal in terms of “Total Citations to COVID-19 Articles” ( n = 1192). Western Journal of Emergency Medicine published the greatest proportion of COVID-19 articles (Total COVID-19 Articles/Total Articles = 0.3). World Journal of Emergency Surgery ranked in the first place in terms of citations per COVID-19 articles ( n = 33.2). The most common studied field was Effects of COVID-19 on the Health System ( n = 222). The US was the most productive country with 188 COVID-19 publications and 1411 citations to these publications, followed by Italy.

Conclusion

The contribution of EM journals to COVID-19 literature is controversial. “Effects of COVID-19 on the Health System” is the most studied field. “Clinical Properties, Ethical Issues and Treatment Methods” are neglected fields in EM journals.

Related collections

Most cited references 10

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an evidence map of medical literature

Nan Liu, Marcel Lucas Chee, Chenglin Niu … (2020)

Background Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in December 2019, a substantial body of COVID-19 medical literature has been generated. As of June 2020, gaps and longitudinal trends in the COVID-19 medical literature remain unidentified, despite potential benefits for research prioritisation and policy setting in both the COVID-19 pandemic and future large-scale public health crises. Methods In this paper, we searched PubMed and Embase for medical literature on COVID-19 between 1 January and 24 March 2020. We characterised the growth of the early COVID-19 medical literature using evidence maps and bibliometric analyses to elicit cross-sectional and longitudinal trends and systematically identify gaps. Results The early COVID-19 medical literature originated primarily from Asia and focused mainly on clinical features and diagnosis of the disease. Many areas of potential research remain underexplored, such as mental health, the use of novel technologies and artificial intelligence, pathophysiology of COVID-19 within different body systems, and indirect effects of COVID-19 on the care of non-COVID-19 patients. Few articles involved research collaboration at the international level (24.7%). The median submission-to-publication duration was 8 days (interquartile range: 4–16). Conclusions Although in its early phase, COVID-19 research has generated a large volume of publications. However, there are still knowledge gaps yet to be filled and areas for improvement for the global research community. Our analysis of early COVID-19 research may be valuable in informing research prioritisation and policy planning both in the current COVID-19 pandemic and similar global health crises.

0 comments Cited 37 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Research methodology and characteristics of journal articles with original data, preprint articles and registered clinical trial protocols about COVID-19

Mahir Fidahic, Danijela Nujic, Renata Runjic … (2020)

Background The research community reacted rapidly to the emergence of COVID-19. We aimed to assess characteristics of journal articles, preprint articles, and registered trial protocols about COVID-19 and its causal agent SARS-CoV-2. Methods We analyzed characteristics of journal articles with original data indexed by March 19, 2020, in World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 collection, articles published on preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv by April 3, 2010. Additionally, we assessed characteristics of clinical trials indexed in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) by April 7, 2020. Results Among the first 2118 articles on COVID-19 published in scholarly journals, 533 (25%) contained original data. The majority was published by authors from China (75%) and funded by Chinese sponsors (75%); a quarter was published in the Chinese language. Among 312 articles that self-reported study design, the most frequent were retrospective studies (N = 88; 28%) and case reports (N = 86; 28%), analyzing patients’ characteristics (38%). Median Journal Impact Factor of journals where articles were published was 5.099. Among 1088 analyzed preprint articles, the majority came from authors affiliated in China (51%) and were funded by sources in China (46%). Less than half reported study design; the majority were modeling studies (62%), and analyzed transmission/risk/prevalence (43%). Of the 927 analyzed registered trials, the majority were interventional (58%). Half were already recruiting participants. The location for the conduct of the trial in the majority was China (N = 522; 63%). The median number of planned participants was 140 (range: 1 to 15,000,000). Registered intervention trials used highly heterogeneous primary outcomes and tested highly heterogeneous interventions; the most frequently studied interventions were hydroxychloroquine (N = 39; 7.2%) and chloroquine (N = 16; 3%). Conclusions Early articles on COVID-19 were predominantly retrospective case reports and modeling studies. The diversity of outcomes used in intervention trial protocols indicates the urgent need for defining a core outcome set for COVID-19 research. Chinese scholars had a head start in reporting about the new disease, but publishing articles in Chinese may limit their global reach. Mapping publications with original data can help finding gaps that will help us respond better to the new public health emergency.

0 comments Cited 30 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Post‐traumatic stress and stress disorders during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Survey of emergency physicians

Catherine Marco, Gregory L Larkin, V Feeser … (2020)

Abstract Objective Emergency physicians routinely encounter stressful clinical situations, including treating victims of crime, violence, and trauma; facing the deaths of patients; and delivering bad news. During a pandemic, stress may be increased for healthcare workers. This study was undertaken to identify symptoms of post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among emergency physicians during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Methods This cross‐sectional survey was developed using the Life Events Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition: DSM‐5 (DSM‐5) and the PTSD Checklist for DSM‐5 (PCL‐5). The survey was distributed to members of the American College of Emergency Physicians from May 21, 2020, through June 22, 2020. Results Among 1300 emergency physicians, a significant number of participants (22.3%; 95% confidence interval, 20.3–24.3%) reported symptoms of stress consistent with PTSD (PCL score ≥ 33). Higher PCL‐5 scores were associated with age younger than 50 years (P < 0.05) and <10 years in practice (P < 0.05). The major sources of stress identified by participants included disinformation about COVID‐19, computer work/electronic medical record, personal protective equipment concerns, and workload. The most common consequences of workplace stress were feeling distant or cut off from other people and sleep disturbance, such as trouble falling or staying asleep. Conclusions A significant number of emergency physicians reported symptoms of stress consistent with PTSD. Higher PCL‐5 scores were associated with age younger than 50 years and <10 years in practice.

0 comments Cited 22 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Am J Emerg Med

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Am J Emerg Med

Title: The American Journal of Emergency Medicine

Publisher: Elsevier Inc.

ISSN (Print): 0735-6757

ISSN (Electronic): 1532-8171

Publication date PMC-release: 6 March 2021

Publication date (Electronic): 6 March 2021

Affiliations

[a ]Hitit University, School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Çorum, Turkey

[b ]Samsun Ondokuzmayıs University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Samsun, Turkey

Author notes

[* ]Corresponding author at: Kuzey Kampüsü, Çevre Yolu Blv., 19030 Çorum Merkez, Turkey

Article

Publisher Item ID: S0735-6757(21)00187-X

DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.03.003

PMC ID: 7936832

SO-VID: fdc4c0b5-5843-4ab3-837e-9f513b50fc36

License:

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

History

Date received : 31 January 2021

Date revision received : 1 March 2021

Date accepted : 1 March 2021

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 3

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 55

See all reference authors

Comparison of performances of top emergency medicine journals in terms of COVID-19 publications in 2020

Read this article at

Abstract

Introduction

Material and methods

Results

Conclusion

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 10

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an evidence map of medical literature

Research methodology and characteristics of journal articles with original data, preprint articles and registered clinical trial protocols about COVID-19

Post‐traumatic stress and stress disorders during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Survey of emergency physicians

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 41

Cited by 3

Most referenced authors 55