Worldwide inequality in production of systematic reviews

نویسندگان

  • Arsia Jamali Scientific Research center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, & Exceptional Talents Development Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Kazem Heidari Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Kiana Hassanpour Students’ Scientific Research center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, & Exceptional Talents Development Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Pasha Anvari Students’ Scientific Research center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, & Exceptional Talents Development Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Raika Jamali Students’ Scientific Research center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Reza Majdzadeh Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, & Knowledge Utilization Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Saharnaz Nedjat Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, & Knowledge Utilization Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Sima Nedjat Knowledge Utilization Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, & University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده مقاله:

Background: Investment in science is vital for the development and well-being of societies. This study aims to assess the scientific productivity of countries by quantifying their publication of systematic reviews taking the gross national income per capita (GNIPC) into account. Methods: Medline and ISI Web of Science were searched for systematic reviews published between 1st January 2006 and 31st December 2010. The productivity of each country was quantified by exploring the authors’ affiliation. The GNIPC was used according to the World Bank Report. Concentration index (CI) was calculated as the index of inequality.  Results: CI of percentage of systematic reviews as a function of percentage of countries ranked by GNIPC was 0.82 which indicates inequality in production of systematic reviews in pro rich countries. Countries with high income produced 206.23 times more systematic reviews than low income countries, while this ratio for lower middle and upper middle countries was 9.67 and 12.97, respectively. The highest concentration index was observed in clinical sciences (0.76) and the lowest in public health (0.61). Conclusion: This study demonstrates a significant gap between industrialized and non-industrialized countries in the production of systematic reviews. Addressing this gap needs tremendous national and international efforts.

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

worldwide inequality in production of systematic reviews

background: investment in science is vital for the development and well-being of societies. this study aims to assess the scientific productivity of countries by quantifying their publication of systematic reviews taking the gross national income per capita (gnipc) into account. methods: medline and isi web of science were searched for systematic reviews published between 1st january 2006 and 3...

متن کامل

An Introduction to Living Systematic Reviews

سخن سردبیر Editorial مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی رفسنجان دوره 20، اردیبهشت 1400، 146-145       درآمدی بر مرورهای نظام‌مند زنده An Introduction to Living Systematic Reviews   محسن رضائیان[1]   M. Rezaeian    تا کنون در سخنان سردبیری مجله دانشگاه، درباره انواع مقالات مروری، مطالب گوناگونی را به رشته‌ تحریر در آورده‌ایم. هدف از نگارش این مقالات، آشنا ساختن خوانندگان و نویسندگان فرهیخته م...

متن کامل

Medical and Surgical Treatment of Reproductive Outcomes in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Background Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common and complex condition affecting up to 18% of reproductive-aged women with reproductive, metabolic and psychological dysfunction. We performed an overview and appraisal of methodological quality of systematic reviews assessing medical and surgical treatments for reproductive outcomes in women with PCOS. Methods This was an overview of syste...

متن کامل

A Systematic Overview of Reviews on the Efficacy of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Erectile Dysfunction

Background & aim: This systematic overview of reviews on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was performed to summarize the clinical efficacy of this approach in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) and assess methodological quality of the included reviews. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed to find the systematic reviews and meta-analyses on CAM interventions (e.g., a...

متن کامل

Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews

Systematic literature reviews including meta-analyses are invaluable scientific activities. The rationale for such reviews is well established. Health care providers, researchers, and policy makers are inundated with unmanageable amounts of information; they need systematic reviews to efficiently integrate existing information and provide data for rational decision making. Systematic reviews es...

متن کامل

منابع من

با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ذخیره در منابع من قبلا به منابع من ذحیره شده

{@ msg_add @}


عنوان ژورنال

دوره 29  شماره 1

صفحات  1270- 1277

تاریخ انتشار 2015-01

با دنبال کردن یک ژورنال هنگامی که شماره جدید این ژورنال منتشر می شود به شما از طریق ایمیل اطلاع داده می شود.

کلمات کلیدی

میزبانی شده توسط پلتفرم ابری doprax.com

copyright © 2015-2023