• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.31-50
• /
• 2007

This paper presents a scientometric analysis of the growth of literature output in the field of Hepatitis covered in three bibliographic databases namely MEDLINE, CINAHL and IPA. The literature covered in three databases for the period 1984-2003 was considered. MEDLINE covered the maximum of 75750 records during the study period 1984 to 2003. This is followed by CINAHL and IPA databases. It is found that the annual growth rate of literature in a particular field of knowledge will not be uniform and in order to measure the rate of growth from year after year, the application of RGR is quite appropriate. The RGR has shown a decreasing trend, with a slight fluctuation of growth rate for the years 1985 and 1997. The output by colleges, universities, corporate sector and research institutions with reference to RGR and Dt has shown mixed results such as increasing trend, decreasing trend and fluctuation trend. Hepatitis research indicates a different picture when the RGR and Dt were calculated by year-wise both in terms of number of papers and number of pages.

• Journal of Information Management
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.215-240
• /
• 2008

This paper presents a scientometric analysis of national patterns of research output and priorities in the sub-fields of Hepatitis covered in three bibliographic databases namely MEDLINE, CINAHL and IPA. The literature covered in three databases for the period 1984-2003 was considered. We have already discussed the Trends in the Growth of Literature on Hepatitis in our previous paper. Therefore in this paper only sub-fields analysis is presented. It has been found that the Hepatitis literature output has been grouped in 23 major sub-fields based on databases covered. It was found that there were high priorities for some of the sub-fields of Hepatitis research during 1984-1993. It was found that the research priority profile was more or less homogenous since majority of the sub-fields are showing either below or above average levels of priority profile. In the first phase of the research period covering from 1984-1993, there are high priorities in 10 sub-fields in USA followed by 9 in UK and 8 in Germany, 7 each in Canada, Russia and Netherlands. On the other hand, in the second phase (1994-2003) there are high priorities for 10 sub-fields in Germany, 9 in UK, 8 in USA, 7 each in Canada, Russia and Netherlands. In the productivity of Pediatrics sub-field, India is in the third position.