The World Health Organization declared the current monkeypox outbreak a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on July 23, 2022, as it has posed a great threat to human health. This bibliometric analysis aimed to explore the current research hotspots focused on monkeypox.

A systematic search of the Web of Science Core Collection database was conducted for published articles on monkeypox from database inception to February 23, 2023. VOSviewer software was used for analysis and visualization of research results.

A total of 1646 publications on monkeypox virus were included for bibliometric analysis. Results showed that (1) the number of publications about monkeypox virus increased significantly in 2022, (2) smallpox and monkeypox virus were popular research keywords, (3) the United States has made the most significant contribution to the study of monkeypox virus, (4) Journal of Virology was the most active journal in publishing articles about monkeypox, and (5) research themes mainly included the body’s reaction after monkeypox infection, epidemiology, diagnosis, and pathological mechanisms.

Future research should focus on early sensitive diagnostic measures of monkeypox and the development of vaccines based on the characteristics of the virus. Study findings also provided key areas for public health experts to focus on and collaborate with policymakers.

Social Network Analysis is a method of analyzing coauthorship networks or relationships through graph theory. Institutional Development Award (IDeA) Networks for Clinical and Translational Research (IDeA-CTR) was designed to expand the capability for clinical and translational research to enhance National Institutes of Health funding.

All publications from a cohort of clinical and translational scientists in Oklahoma were collected through a PubMed search for 2014 through 2021 in October 2022. For this study’s bibliometric portion, we pulled the citations from iCite in November of 2022.

There were 2,391 articles published in 1,019 journals. The number of papers published by year increased from 56 in 2014 to 448 in 2021. The network had an average of 6.4 authors per paper, with this increasing by year from 5.3 in 2014 to 6.9 in 2021. The average journal impact factor for the overall network was 7.19, with a range from 0.08 to 202.73. The Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (OSCTR) network is a small world network with relatively weak ties.

This study provides an overview of coauthorship in an IDeA-CTR collaboration. We show the growth and structure of coauthorship in OSCTR, highlighting the importance of understanding and fostering collaboration within research networks.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread quickly all over the world. The number of studies in this field being performed and published is increasing day by day. The aim of this study is to analyze the publications in the field of COVID-19 with the help of bibliometric methods. After bibliometric analysis, the second aim is to investigate the relationship between the number of publications in countries and the number of total cases.

The data in the study were taken from the Web of Science (WOS) site. Analyses and mapping processes were performed using VOSviewer and SPSS package program. The words “COVID-19”, “Novel Coronavirus”, “2019-nCoV”, “SARS-CoV-2” were used as key words for analysis. The data include publications from 2019 to 2021 (January 10).

As a result of the study, a total of 38,080 publications were evaluated. It was determined that the countries with the highest number of publications on COVID-19 were China and the United States, and the country with the highest number of citations was China. Most of the studies in the field of COVID-19 have been conducted on General Internal Medicine and Public Enviromental Occupational Health. In addition, statistically significant relationships were observed between the number of publications and the number of total cases in terms of countries (r = 0.806; P < 0.001).

As a result, bibliometric analysis about COVID-19 can be useful for the future studies. It gives a general perspective of the studies.

The current study sought to describe and compare study type, research design and translation phase of published research in nutrition and dietetic journals in 1998 and 2018.

This was a repeat cross-sectional bibliographic analysis of Nutrition and Dietetics research. All eligible studies in the top eight Nutrition and Dietetics indexed journals in 1998 and 2018 were included. Two independent reviewers coded each study for research design (study type and study design) and translation phase (T0-T4) of the research using seminal texts in the field.

Not relevant.

Not relevant.

The number of publications (1998, n 1030; 2018, n 1016) has not changed over time, but the research type, design and translation phases have. The proportion of intervention studies in 1998 (43·8 %) was significantly higher than 2018 (19·4 %). In 2018, more reviews (46·9 % v. 15·6 % in 1998) and less randomised trials (14·3 % v. 37·8 % in 1998) were published. In regard to translation phase, there was a higher proportion of T2–T4 research in 2018 (18·3 % v. 3·8 % in 1998); however, the proportion of T3/T4 (dissemination, implementation and population-level research) research was still low (<3 %). Our sensitivity analysis with the four journals that remained in the top eight journal across the two time periods found no differences in the research type, design and translation phases across time.

There was a reduction in intervention and T0 publications, alongside higher publication of clinical study designs over time; however, published T3/T4 research in Nutrition and Dietetics is low. A greater focus on publishing interventions and dissemination and implementation may be needed.

To access the trends and focuses of publications on public health emergency preparedness in the timeframe 1997-2019.

Publications related to public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Bibliometric analyses including output statistics, co-authorship analysis, citation analysis, co-citation analysis, and co-occurrence analysis were performed and mapped using VOSviewer.

A total of 1058 publications on PHEP were included in this study. There was an increasing trend of publication output and citations since 2002. A total of 4605 authors from 1587 institutes and 92 countries contributed to the publications, and the United States lead the field. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness was the most active and co-cited journal among 243 journals. The knowledge foundation mainly focused on the professionals’ capacity, education, and conceptions of PHEP. Epidemics, natural disasters, terrorism, education, and communication were the principle topics; while “vulnerable populations,” “disaster medicine,” and “hurricane” were the recent hotspots in this field.

Significant progresses had been achieved worldwide in the past 2 decades, however, improvement of research activity and international collaboration is still a need for most countries.