Coronavirus mapping in scientific publications: When science advances rapidly and collectively, is access to this knowledge open to society?

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is creating a global health emergency. Mapping this health emergency in scientific publications demands multiple approaches to obtain a picture as complete as possible. To progress in the knowledge of this pandemic and to control its effects, international collaborations between researchers are essentials, as well as having open and immediate access to scientific publications, what we called "coopetition". Our main objectives are to identify the most productive countries in coronavirus publications, to analyse the international scientific collaboration on this topic, and to study the proportion and typology of open accessibility to these publications. We have analyzed 18,875 articles indexed in Web of Science. We performed the descriptive statistical analysis in order to explore the performance of the more prolific countries and organizations, as well as paying attention to the last 2 years. Registers have been analyzed separately via the VOSviewer software, drawing a network of links among countries and organizations to identify the starred countries and organizations, and the strongest links of the net. We have explored the capacity of researchers to generate scientific knowledge about a health crisis emergency, and their global capacity to collaborate among them in a global emergency. We consider that science is moving rapidly to find solutions to international health problems but access to this knowledge by society is not so quick due to several limitations (open access policies, corporate interests, etc.). We have observed that papers from China in the last 3 months (from January 2020 to March 2020) have a strong impact compared with papers published in years before. The United States and China are the major producers of documents of our sample, followed by all European countries, especially the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and France. At the same time, the leading role of Saudi Arabia, Canada or South Korea should be noted, with a significant number of documents submitted but very different dynamics of international collaboration. The proportion of international collaboration is growing in all countries in 2019-2020, which contrasts with the situation of the last two decades. The organizations providing the most documents to the sample are mostly Chinese. The percentage of open access articles on coronavirus for the period 2001-2020 is 59.2% but if we focus in 2020 the figures increase up to 91.4%, due to the commitment of commercial publishers with the emergency.

Keywords: 2019-nCoV; Bibliometric analysis; COVID-19; Coronavirus; Open access; SARS-CoV-2; Scientific collaborations.

Fig. 1

Distribution of articles, according to the year of publication and successful retrieval from both WoS sources or not—1945–2020

Fig. 2

Network visualization per countries WoS Core Collection data—2001–2020

Fig. 3

Network visualization per countries WoS Core Collection data—2019–2020

Fig. 4

Network visualization per organization WoS Core Collection data—2001–2020

Fig. 5

Network visualization per organizations WoS Core Collection data—2019–2020

Fig. 6

Annual distribution of: a average percentage of OA in cited references versus the percentage of OA in article; b percentage of OA in articles by funding or collaboration; d average percentage of OA in cited references by funding or collaboration, and; d average percentage of Price Index (references) by funding or collaboration—2001–2020. Subtitle: in order to guarantee consistent percentages in articles cited references, we have discarded articles with less than 10 references (corresponding to ~ 3%)

Fig. 7

Distribution of countries, in each period and cluster, according to average percentage of OA in cited references versus percentage of OA in articles. Subtitle: in order to guarantee consistent percentages in articles cited references, we have discarded articles with less than 10 references (corresponding to ~ 3%)

Fig. 8

Distribution of countries according to the relative importance of the other types against Gold-DOAJ, with different each period in the axis. Subtitle: the relative indicator consists of the ratio between the share of other types (Bronze, Green and Other-Gold) and the DOAJ-Gold