Medical speciality research in Saudi Arabia: A bibliometric assessment of productivity and worldwide ranking

Abdulhakim B. Jamjoom

12 citations0/0 files storedJournal of health specialties

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Academic Writing and Publishing Psychology Research and Bibliometrics

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to identify the medical specialities that had a positive relative contribution to scientific productivity in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) over the last two decades and to determine the influence of their contribution on KSA worldwide ranking in these specialities. Methods: SCImago Journal and Country Rank was used to determine KSA's ranking in 46 medical specialities during 1996-2014 based on four productivity indices. Relative Specialisation Index (RSI) was calculated for each speciality. Specialities with RSI >0 were defined as the positive relative contribution specialities in KSA. They were compared with the remaining specialities using a number of parameters that were examined statistically. Results: The median KSA ranking in 46 specialities was 42 for total documents, 43 for total cites, 79 for citations per document and 44 for h-index. Fourteen (30%) specialities were designated as the positive relative contribution specialities in KSA. These were ophthalmology, medicine (miscellaneous), paediatrics, complementary medicine, clinical genetics, clinical biochemistry, transplantation, surgery, infectious disease, nephrology, pulmonology, epidemiology, otolaryngology and anaesthesiology. Being a positive relative contribution speciality in KSA was not influenced by the nature of speciality or by having its own Saudi journal; however, it was associated with a significantly higher KSA ranking based on total documents, total cites and h-index but not based on citations per document. Conclusions: Medical speciality contribution to research productivity in KSA was not influenced by the speciality having a Saudi journal. Positive relative contribution specialities had a significant impact on KSA ranking in three out of the four indices. KSA's medical specialities were ranked relatively low based on citations per document. KSA researchers of all medical disciplines should be encouraged to publish quality research in local and international journals.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

References

2008Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor 1986Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact 2013Worldwide research productivity in the field of rheumatology from 1996 to 2010: a bibliometric analysis 2006World dental research production: an ISI database approach (1999–2003)2014Comparison Between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Metrics, and SCimago Journal Rank Indicator of Pediatric Neurology Journals 2015Worldwide Research Productivity in the Field of Arthroscopy: A Bibliometric Analysis 2015A worldwide bibliometric analysis of published literature in plastic and reconstructive surgery 2015Worldwide productivity in the field of foot and ankle research from 2009–2013: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals

Cited by

2023The landscape of biomedical research progress, challenges and prospects in Saudi Arabia-A systematic review 2019Research in Dentistry at Saudi Arabia: Analysis of Citation Impact

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.