PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14963238

Mapping knowledge domains: characterizing PNAS.

Abstract

A review of data mining and analysis techniques that can be used for the mapping of knowledge domains is given. Literature mapping techniques can be based on authors, documents, journals, words, and/or indicators. Most mapping questions are related to research assessment or to the structure and dynamics of disciplines or networks. Several mapping techniques are demonstrated on a data set comprising 20 years of papers published in PNAS. Data from a variety of sources are merged to provide unique indicators of the domain bounded by PNAS. By using funding source information and citation counts, it is shown that, on an aggregate basis, papers funded jointly by the U.S. Public Health Service (which includes the National Institutes of Health) and non-U.S. government sources outperform papers funded by other sources, including by the U.S. Public Health Service alone. Grant data from the National Institute on Aging show that, on average, papers from large grants are cited more than those from small grants, with performance increasing with grant amount. A map of the highest performing papers over the 20-year period was generated by using citation analysis. Changes and trends in the subjects of highest impact within the PNAS domain are described. Interactions between topics over the most recent 5-year period are also detailed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kevin W Boyack. 2004-02-12. Mapping knowledge domains: characterizing PNAS.. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307509100

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Erroneous and unsatisfactory filling in of drug charts--a potential source of medication error].

BACKGROUND: Medication errors may have serious consequences for patients and erroneous drug charts represent one of several causes of error. As part of a quality assurance survey, we studied whether user documentation on the charts was in accordance with the guidelines for chart keeping. MATERIAL AND METHODS: On the same day, the drug charts of all hospitalized patients (n = 401) were copied and a representative sample of 207 charts was reviewed. RESULTS: 15 charts had no prescriptions; 14 of the remaining 192 charts (7 %) were correctly filled in. 152 charts (79 %) had deviations that we considered might pose only minor potential health risk; 26 (14 %) had deviations implying potential risk. No charts had deviations considered to pose major risk. INTERPRETATION: Several deviations from the guidelines were found and better training is needed; we recommend standardisation of drug charts and guidelines.

Documentation↗