= 0.99). Concerning productivity from institutions, the

Матеріал з HistoryPedia
Версія від 07:41, 15 вересня 2017, створена Edger72copper (обговореннявнесок) (Створена сторінка: The write-up was published inside the Bulletin of theTable 1 Poisson loglinear regression for worldwide investigation productivity on water related diseases uti...)

(різн.) ← Попередня версія • Поточна версія (різн.) • Новіша версія → (різн.)
Перейти до: навігація, пошук

The write-up was published inside the Bulletin of theTable 1 Poisson loglinear regression for worldwide investigation productivity on water related diseases utilizing the http://about:blank keyword "microbiology"Parameter (Intercept) Keyword (microbiology) B 3.086 .058 P .000 .000 Exp (B) 21.881 1.059 95 Wald Self-confidence Interval for Exp(B) Decrease 20.073 1.056 Upper 23.853 1.Dependent variable: worldwide productivity. Six on the top rated ten productive institutions were based within the USA, a single was WHO, when the remaining three were primarily based within the UK, Germany and Taiwan. There was a powerful substantial and inverse connection (r = - 0.83, p 0.01) involving rank with the institution and also the total citations for publication for each institution. Institution which ranked initial had the highest total citation whilst those in rank number ten had the least total citations. Similar relationship existed amongst rank of the institution and the h-index (r = - 0.913, p 0.01). Concerning leading productive authors, no substantial dominance was seen and most authors within the top ten list had investigation productivity amongst 142 articles (Table 5). However, the majority of authors (90 ) within the best ten list were from the USA even though the last 1 in the list was from Spain. Top ten productive authors is shown in Table five. There was no considerable correlation (p > 0.05) involving the rank on the authorand the percentage of hugely cited articles published by the authors.Citation evaluation and most cited articlesA total of 1702 (75.07 ) articles have been cited a minimum of when; the remaining articles were not cited at all. Cited articles were further analyzed employing VOSviewer to create visualization maps. Co-authorship evaluation employing VOSviewer showed 3 clusters of authors (Fig. three). Cluster quantity one integrated 14 authors, three of them have been amongst the top ten productive authors: Parvez, F (116 co-authorships), Ahsan, H (113 co-authorships), and Chen, Y (112 co-authorships). Authors with greater number of co-authorships had larger collaboration compared with these with reduced quantity of co-authorships. Furthermore, authors in the same cluster are these with closer collaboration in comparison with authors who exist in other clusters. Cluster quantity two integrated 12 authors, a single of them was from the leading ten productive authors; Colford Jr, J.M (17 co-authorships). Cluster number 3 integrated 11 authors, four of them had been within the prime ten productive list: Wade, T.J (47 co-authorships), Calderon, R.I (34 co-authorships), Craun, G.F (36 coauthorships), and Beach M.J (36 co-authorships). The best cited articles are shown in Table six [6, 7, 9, 217]. The best cited article was about arsenic in drinking water in Bangladesh and received a total of 919 citations. The report was published inside the Bulletin of theTable 1 Poisson loglinear regression for worldwide study productivity on water connected ailments making use of the keyword "microbiology"Parameter (Intercept) Keyword (microbiology) B three.086 .058 P .000 .000 Exp (B) 21.881 1.059 95 Wald Self-assurance Interval for Exp(B) Reduced 20.073 1.056 Upper 23.853 1.Dependent variable: worldwide productivity. Predictor variable: quantity of articles with keyword "microbiology". B: coefficient estimates; Exp(B): Exponentiated values in the coefficientsSweileh et al.