Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Chronic pain is a major health issue requiring an approach that not only considers medication, but also many other factors included in the Bio-Psycho-Social model of pain. New technologies, such as mobile applications, are tools to address these factors, although in many cases they lack proven quality or are not based on scientific evidence, so it is necessary to review and measure their quality. Objective: The aim is to review and measure the quality of mobile applications for the management of pain using the mobile app rating scale (MARS). Methods: This review included 18 pain related mobile apps from App Store and Android Market. The MARS was administered to measure their quality. We list the scores (of each section and the final score) of every app and we report the mean score (and standard deviation) for an overall vision of the quality of the pain related apps. We compare the section scores between the groups defined according to the tertiles via ANOVA analyses, after checking for normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test). Results: The global quality ranged from 1.74 (worst app) to 4.35 (best app). The 18 apps, as a whole, obtained an average score of 3.17 (SD=0.75). The best rated sections were “Functionality” (Mean=3.92;SD=0.72), “Aesthetics” (Mean=3.3;SD=1.05), and “Engagement” (Mean=2.87;SD=1.14), while the worst rated were “App specific” (Mean=2.48;SD=1), “Information” (Mean=2.52;SD=0.82), and “App subjective quality” (Mean=2.68;SD=1.22). The main differences between tertiles were found on “app subjective quality”, “Engagement”, “Aesthetics”, and “App specific”. Conclusions: Current pain related apps are of a certain quality, mainly regarding their technical aspects, although they fail to offer information and have an impact on the user. Most apps are not based on scientific evidence, have not been rigorously tested, and the confidentiality of the information collected is not guaranteed. Future apps would need to improve these aspects and exploit the capabilities of current devices.

Stroke is the main cause of disability in adulthood. Recent advances in virtual reality (VR) technologies have led to its increased use in the rehabilitation of stroke patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effectiveness of game-based reality on upper limb (UL) motor function and quality of life after stroke. In March 2018, a search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, PEDro, Web of Science, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Medline at EBSCO. The selection criteria were all RCTs published in English or Spanish during the past 10 years. The PEDro scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the studies. A total of 20 clinical trials were included in the systemic review, of which 15 contributed information to the meta-analysis. Favorable results were found for VR interventions on UL motor function (Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity, standardized mean difference [SMD] = 1.53, 95% CI [0.51–2.54]) and quality of life (functional independence measure, SMD = 0.77, 95% CI [0.05–1.49]). The results demonstrate the potential benefits of VR interventions on the recovery of UL motor function and on quality of life after stroke.

Background: Chronic pain (CP) is 1 of the leading causes of disability worldwide and represents a significant burden on individual, social, and economic aspects. Potential tools, such as mobile health (mHealth) systems, are emerging for the self-management of patients with CP. Objective: A systematic review was conducted to analyze the effects of mHealth interventions on CP management, based on pain intensity, quality of life (QoL), and functional disability assessment, compared to conventional treatment or nonintervention. Methods: PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines were followed to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) databases from February to March 2022. No filters were used. The eligibility criteria were RCTs of adults (≥18 years old) with CP, intervened with mHealth systems based on mobile apps for monitoring pain and health-related outcomes, for pain and behavioral self-management, and for performing therapeutic approaches, compared to conventional treatments (physical, occupational, and psychological therapies; usual medical care; and education) or nonintervention, reporting pain intensity, QoL, and functional disability. The methodological quality and risk of bias (RoB) were assessed using the Checklist for Measuring Quality, the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence, and the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. Results: In total, 22 RCTs, involving 2641 patients with different CP conditions listed in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11), including chronic low back pain (CLBP), chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMSP), chronic neck pain (CNP), unspecified CP, chronic pelvic pain (CPP), fibromyalgia (FM), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and osteoarthritis (OA). A total of 23 mHealth systems were used to conduct a variety of CP self-management strategies, among which monitoring pain and symptoms and home-based exercise programs were the most used. Beneficial effects of the use of mHealth systems in reducing pain intensity (CNP, FM, IC/BPS, and OA), QoL (CLBP, CNP, IBS, and OA), and functional disability (CLBP, CMSP, CNP, and OA) were found. Most of the included studies (18/22, 82%) reported medium methodological quality and were considered as highly recommendable; in addition, 7/22 (32%) studies had a low RoB, 10/22 (45%) had some concerns, and 5/22 (23%) had a high RoB. Conclusions: The use of mHealth systems indicated positive effects for pain intensity in CNP, FM, IC/BPS, and OA; for QoL in CLBP, CNP, IBS, and OA; and for functional disability in CLBP, CMSP, CNP, and OA. Thus, mHealth seems to be an alternative to improving pain-related outcomes and QoL and could be part of multimodal strategies for CP self-management. High-quality studies are needed to merge the evidence and recommendations of the use of mHealth systems for CP management. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022315808; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=315808

Scientific activity has become increasingly complex in recent years. The need for international research collaboration has thus become a common pattern in science. In this current landscape, countries face the problem of maintaining their competitiveness while cooperating with other countries to achieve relevant research outputs. In this international context, publications from international collaborations tend to achieve greater scientific impact than those from domestic ones. To design policies that improve the competitiveness of countries and organizations, it thus becomes necessary to understand the factors and mechanisms that influence the benefits and impact of international research. In this regard, the aim of this study is to confirm whether the differences in impact between international and domestic collaborations are affected by their topics and structure. To perform this study, we examined the Library and Information Science category of the Web of Science database between 2015 and 2019. A science mapping analysis approach was used to extract the themes and their structure according to collaboration type and in the whole category (2015–2019). We also looked for differences in these thematic aspects in top countries and in communities of collaborating countries. The results showed that the thematic factor influences the impact of international research, as the themes in this type of collaboration lie at the forefront of the Library and Information Science category (e.g., technologies such as artificial intelligence and social media are found in the category), while domestic collaborations have focused on more well-consolidated themes (e.g., academic libraries and bibliometrics). Organizations, countries, and communities of countries must therefore consider this thematic factor when designing strategies to improve their competitiveness and collaborate.