Are all voices heard in the COVID-19 debate?
- PDF / 963,716 Bytes
- 4 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 63 Downloads / 180 Views
Are all voices heard in the COVID-19 debate? Stan Benjamens1 · Vincent E. de Meijer1 · Robert A. Pol1 · Martijn P. D. Haring1 Received: 30 August 2020 / Accepted: 22 September 2020 © Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2020
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has vast global consequences. Yet, effective mitigation strategies and economic and medical outfall differ extensively across the globe. It is currently unclear how well researchers from all continents are represented in the unsolicited and solicited publications. A literature review was performed in SCOPUS on COVID-19 oriented publications in the four most impactful medical journals. These included the British Medical Journal, Journal of the American Medical Association, the New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet. We identified 809 eligible publications out of identified 924 records. The vast majority of publications on COVID-19, in the four can be considered European (47.7%) or North-American (37.3%) research. Chinese reports were relatively common (8.8%); however, reports from other Asian countries (3.2%) were minimal. Research from the African (1.0%) and South-American continents (0.6%) was rarely published in these journals. These observations are not surprising, as they reflect global academic publishing. However, involving all continents into COVID-19 research is important as COVID-19 management strategies and societal and economic consequences differ extensively across the globe. We see an important role for medical journals in encouraging global voices through solicited articles, to ensure a weighted research and humanitarian response. Keywords Global health · COVID-19 · Literature review
Introduction The global fight against the current COVID-19 pandemic warrants fast and reliable distribution of new insights into the direct and indirect health consequences. The prompt need of robust and reliable scientific data resulted in an overwhelming number of scientific publications. Though, a measured and comprehensive global response requires a balanced distribution of publications.
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s1119 2-020-03730-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. * Stan Benjamens [email protected] 1
Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientometrics
Methods The Scopus database was systematically searched for COVID-19 oriented publications published from December 31, 2019, to July 27, 2020, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statements checklist and flowchart (Supplement). The query included “COVID-19” (all text) and was limited the four most impactful medical journals: The New England Journal of Medicine; The Lancet; the Journal of the American Medical Association; and the British Medical Journal. All articles authored by a member of the editorial board or by the journal’s writ
Data Loading...