Articlegreen2019

An Evolutive and Scientometric Research on Tissue Engineering Reviews

Miguel Ángel Martín‐Piedra · Antonio Santisteban‐Espejo · José A. Moral-Muñoz · Fernando Campos · Jesús Chato‐Astrain · Óscar Darío García‐García +2 more

9 citations0/0 files storedTissue Engineering Part A

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

Number of publications has been widely used as a measure of research output, especially academic and university research. Number of publications in tissue engineering (TE) has increased year by year since early 1990s. However, after an exponential growth phase, recently publications increase at lower rates, suggesting a consolidation process in which reviews become a relevant and high-evidence document type. The aim of this study is to perform a scientometric evaluation of published literature reviews on TE to assess the status of scientific evolution and confirm the consolidation of TE as a research area. Published reviews on TE from 1991 to 2018 were retrieved from Web of Science core collection and this corpus of knowledge was analyzed by growth rate, research area, source title, and citation. Our results revealed that TE can be considered a consolidating area as it leaves the forefront stage of a gompertzian growth curve model. Original research/review ratio is lineally decreasing during the past decade. The emergence of reviews serves to confirm and refute hypothesis and build up a more reliable theoretical framework as well as a guide for future educational approaches. Distribution assessment of categories and journals indicates the multidisciplinary profile of this area focused on the design and development of new tissues. Biomedical sciences become relevant productors of reviews as they need to support TE innovations with high evidence leading to a safer and more efficient treatment of current injuries and diseases. Impact statement Scientometric analysis of published reviews about tissue engineering (TE) suggests that TE can be considered a consolidating area as it leaves the forefront stage of a gompertzian growth curve model. Biomedical sciences become relevant productors of reviews as they need to support TE innovations with high evidence leading to a safer and more efficient treatment of current injuries and diseases.

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 — 9 citations exist upstream.

References

2008Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews 2015Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references 1997Writing Narrative Literature Reviews 2010The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index 2018Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases 2002Journal impact measures in bibliometric research 2016Sources of technological innovation: Radical and incremental innovation problem-driven to support competitive advantage of firms 2013Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Cited by

2020The challenge of discovering the threshold concepts of medical research areas: A bibliometrics-based approach

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.