Nipah Virus Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications Output during 1999-2018

Gupta, Mueen Ahmed, and Gupta: Nipah Virus Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications Output during 1999-2018

Authors

INTRODUCTION

Nipah virus (NIPV) was first isolated from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens collected from encephalitic patients in Malaysia in 1999. Morphologic, serologic and genetic studies indicated that the virus was closely related to Hendra virus (HENV) isolated in 1994 in Australia and both viruses (non-segmented, negative- stranded RNA viruses) form the new Henipavirus genus within the Paramyxoviridae family.1 Its name originated from Sungai Nipah, a village in the Malaysian Peninsula where pig farmers became ill with encephalitis.2

Nipah virus was first identified as a zoonotic pathogen after an outbreak involving severe respiratory illness in pigs and encephalitic disease in humans in Malaysia and Singapore in 1998 and 1999. Three years later, a genetically distinct NiV independently emerged in India as well as in Bangladesh, where human NiV outbreak events have been reported nearly every year since. A putative NiV also caused an outbreak of disease in horses and people in the Philippines in 2014. To date, there is no reported evidence of NiV outbreaks in humans emerging in any other country than Malaysia, Singapore, Bangladesh, India and Philippines. More than 600 cases of NiV human infections have been reported globally. A total of 276 cases were reported with 106 fatalities (38%) in Malaysia, but case fatalities in later outbreaks in India and Bangladesh were associated with significantly higher case fatality rates of 43 to 100%.3 From 1998 to 2015, more than 600 cases of Nipah virus human infections were reported. Subsequent outbreaks in India and Bangladesh have occurred with high case fatality.4

Virus transmission from bats to humans occurs through inhalation, contact or consumption of NiV contaminated foods. NiV is transmitted by zoonotic (from bats to humans, or from bats to pigs and then to humans) as well as human-to-human routes. Human-to-human transmission is particularly notable in the outbreaks in India and Bangladesh, where it has been reported to account for 75% and 51% of cases, respectively. At present no vaccines or antiviral drugs are available for NiV disease and the treatment is just supportive. Current prevention strategies focus on raising disease awareness in affected areas.3

Nipah virus can cause a range of mild to severe disease in domestic animals such as pigs. Nipah virus infection in humans causes a range of clinical presentations, from asymptomatic infection (subclinical) to acute respiratory infection and fatal encephalitis. Infected people initially develop influenza-like symptoms of fever, headaches, myalgia (muscle pain), vomiting and sore throat. This can be followed by dizziness, drowsiness, altered consciousness and neurological signs that indicate acute encephalitis. Some people can also experience atypical pneumonia and severe respiratory problems, including acute respiratory distress. Encephalitis and seizures occur in severe cases, progressing to coma within 24 to 48 h. The case fatality rate is estimated at 40% to 75%; however, this rate can vary by outbreak depending on local capabilities for epidemiological surveillance and clinical management. Nipah is believed to be transmitted from what are called flying foxes or mega bats, so called because they are the largest bat species. They eat fruits and live in trees. These are a part of the old-world fruit bat family called pteropid bats. Bats often end up being reservoirs for a number of severe infectious diseases including Ebola, SARS coronavirus, Nipah and Hendra.5

The persistence and circulation of the virus within the bat population (Pteropus spp.) and the wide geographical range of the potential reservoirs from Madagascar to Australia, have great implications on human and animal public health, prophylaxis and health education measures.4

Literature Review

So far only one bibliometric study on international contribution to Nipah virus research during 1999-2010 was conducted by Safahieh, Sanni and Zainab,6 which examined 462 papers on Nipah virus research, with a focus on identifying active authors, institutions, countries and citations received. Data was extracted from SCI-Expanded database, (Web of Science) and analyzed using descriptive figures and tables. The active contributing countries were USA (with 41.0% share), followed by Australia (19.3%), Malaysia (16.0%), England (6.5%) and France (5.6%). The productive authors are mainly affiliated to the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, USA and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) in Australia and University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia.

OBJECTIVES

The present study examines the performance of global Nipah virus research during 1999-2018, based on publications output indexed in Scopus database. The study looks at the distribution of global publication output of the world and of 10 most productive countries, by document type and source type, growth rate of its annual and ten year output, the share of international collaborative publications of leading countries, broad subject-wise publication scatter across sub-fields, identification of significant keywords depicting trends in research, publication output and citation impact of top 15 global organizations and authors, identification of 20 significant journals and characteristics of its 79 high cited publications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The publication data on Nipah virus research for the present study was derived from the Scopus database (http://www.scopus.com) covering the period 1999-2018. Keyword “Nipah virus” was searched in “TITLE-ABS-KEY” tag during the period 1999-2018 to get global publication data. This search string was applied first for searching global publication data on Nipah virus research and then further restricted to individual country by name in “country tag” one by one to ascertain publication output of top 10 most productive countries (including India) in Nipah virus research. The first search string was subsequently refined, using analytical tags in Scopus database, by “subject area tag”, “country tag”, “source title tag”, “journal title name” and “affiliation tag”, to get data/information on the distribution of publications output by subject, collaborating countries, author-wise, organization-wise and journal-wise, etc. For citation data, citations to publications were also collected from date of publication till 24 May 2018. The data for the study was collected on 24 May 2018. The data covered for 2018 was incomplete. A number of bibliometric indicators were used to measure the global performance of Nipah virus research.

RESULTS

The global research output of the world in field of Nipah virus cumulated to 1181 publications in 20 years during 1999-2018. The annual output of the world in Nipah virus research increased from 9 in the year 1999 to 57 in 2017, registering 16.23% growth per annum. The research output in fact first increased from 9 to 106 in 2013 and the decreased to 57 in 2017. The cumulative world output in Nipah virus research in 10 years 1999-2008 increased from 458 to 723 publications during succeeding ten-year period 2009-18, registering 57.86% growth. Of the total global publications output, 58.51% (691) appeared as articles, 22.86% (270) as reviews, 4.40% (52) as book chapters, 3.73% (44) as conference papers, 3.05% (36) as editorials, 2.79% (33) as notes, 1.95%(23) as short surveys, 1.69% (20) as letters, 0.42% (5 each) as books and erratum, 0.02%(1) and 0.17%(2) as conference reviews. The citation impact of global publications on Nipah virus research in 20 years averaged to 28.05 citations per publication (CPP) during 1999-2018; its ten-yearly impact averaged to 46.83 CPP for the period 1999-2008, which sharply declined to 16.15 CPP in the succeeding ten-years 2009-2018 (Table 1).

Table 1

World Output in Nipah Virus, 1999-2018.

Publication PeriodWorld
TPTCCPP
19999925102.78
200033225868.42
200135253472.40
200238186048.95
200335192555.00
200465325450.06
200556222639.75
200661237438.92
200759170728.93
200867238535.60
200973228031.23
201075201126.81
201157128322.51
201290240826.76
2013106174516.46
20148097412.18
2015885386.11
2016783654.68
201757711.25
20181940.21
1999-20084582144846.83
2009-187231167916.15
1999-201811813312728.05

TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; CPP=Citations Per Paper

Top 10 Most Productive Countries in Nipah Virus.

The global research output in the field of Nipah Virus research had originated from 62 countries during 1999-2018, of which 46 published 1-10 papers each in 20 years, 7 countries 11-50 papers each, 6 countries 51-100 papers each, 2 countries 101-200 papers each and 1 county 1543 papers. The top 10 most productive countries in Nipah Virus have contributed 50 to 543 publications each during 1999-2018 (Table 2). The top 10 most productive countries in Nipah Virus research accounted for more than 100.0% (113.12%) global publication share and more than 100.0% (148.58%) citation share during 1999-2018. Their ten-early output accounted for more than 100.0% (104.15%) global publication share during 1999-2008 which increased to more than 100.0% (118.81%) during succeeding ten-year period 2009-18. Country-wise, the global publication share of top 10 countries varied widely 4.23% to 45.98% during 1999-2018, with USA accounting for the highest publication share (45.98%), followed by Australia (16.77%), Malaysia (11.09% share) and other 7 countries (from 4.23% to 7.96%) during 1999-2018. The global publication share registered a increasing publication share in USA (8.77%), France (5.16%), Bangladesh (3.63%), India (2.89%), Germany (1.64%), Singapore (1.57%), Canada (1.41%) and U.K. (0.10%), as against decrease in Malaysia (8.63%) and Australia (1.86) in ten years period (1999-2008 and 2009-18). Four of top 10 countries scored relative citation index above the world average of 1.28: Malaysia (1.67), Australia (1.47), Bangladesh (1.41) and USA (1.37) during 1999-2018.

Table 2

Global Publication Share of Top 10 Most Productive Countries in Nipah Virus during 1999-2018.

S.NoName of the CountryNumber of PapersShare of PapersTCCPPHIICP%ICPRCI
1999-20082009-181999-20181999-20082009-181999-20181999-2018
1USA18635754340.6149.3845.982087238.447526248.251.37
2Australia8211619817.9016.0416.77815041.165214673.741.47
3Malaysia755613116.387.7511.09611946.71385844.271.67
4France2272944.809.967.96286730.50294648.941.09
5U.K.3556917.647.757.71326335.86285661.541.28
6Germany2145664.596.225.59171425.97203146.970.93
7India1443573.065.954.8389315.67141424.560.56
8Canada1737543.715.124.57190335.24243972.221.26
9Bangladesh1042522.185.814.40205439.50214688.461.41
10Singapore1535503.284.844.23138427.68173570.000.99
Total4778591336104.15118.81113.124921936.8431.87331.31
World45872311813312728.05
Share of 10 Countries in World Total104.15118.81113.1240.6149.3845.982087238.447526248.251.37

TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; CPP=Citations Per Paper; HI=h-index; ICP=International Collaborative Papers; RCI=Relative Citation Index

International Collaboration

The international collaborative output of top 10 most productive countries in Nipah Virus research as a national share in the country-wise output varied widely from 24.56% to 88.46% with highest share coming from Bangladesh (88.46%), followed by Australia (73.74%), Canada (72.22%), Singapore (70.0%), U.K. (61.54%), France (48.94%), USA (48.25%), Germany (46.97%), Malaysia (44.27%) and India (24.56%) during 1999-2018.

Subject-Wise Distribution of Research Output

According to the Scopus classification, the global Nipah virus research output published during 1999-2018 is distributed across seven sub-fields, with medicine accounting for the highest publications share (50.97%), followed by immunology and microbiology (42.51%), biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (21.25%), agricultural and biological sciences (11.85%), and other 3 sub-fields contribution varying from 4.57% to 6.10% during 1999-2018. Its activity index, which computes change in research activity in the discipline over time 1999-2008 to 2009-18 (world average activity index of a given subject is taken as 100), witnessed increase in immunology and microbiology (from 86.30 to 108.68), biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (from 61.64 to 124.30), agricultural and biological sciences (from 64.47 to 122.51), pharmacology, toxicology and pharmaceutics (from 59.86 to 125.43) and neurosciences (from 85.95 to 108.90), as against decline of research activity in medicine (from 103.23 to 97.95) and veterinary science (from 111.02 to 93.02) from 1999-2008 to 2009-18. Agricultural and biological sciences, among various subjects registered the highest citations impact per paper of 31.16 CPP, FOLLOWED BY immunology and microbiology (29.99), medicine (27.46), neurosciences (26.0) biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (22.26), veterinary science (21.47) and pharmacology, toxicology and pharmaceutics (13.59) during 1999-2018 (Table 3).

Table 3

Subject-Wise Breakup of Global Publications in Nipah Virus Research during 1999-2018.

S. NoSubject*Number of Papers (TP)Activity IndexTCCPP%TP
1999-20082009-181999-20181999-20082009-181999-2018
1Medicine241361602103.2397.951653327.4650.97
2Immunology and Microbiology16833450286.30108.681505729.9942.51
3Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology6019125161.64124.30558822.2621.25
4Agricultural and Biological Sciences3510514064.47122.51436331.1611.85
5Veterinary Science314172111.0293.02154621.476.10
6Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics13435659.86125.4376113.594.74
7Neurosciences18365485.95108.90140426.004.57
World Output4587231181

• There is overlapping of literature covered under various subjects

TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; CPP=Citations Per Paper

Profile of Top 15 Most Productive Global Organizations

Three hundred fifty four (354) organizations participated in global research on Nipah Virus during 1999-2018, of which 298 organizations contributed 1-10 papers each, 31 organizations 11-20 papers each, 18 organizations 21-50 papers each, 5 organizations 51-100 papers each and 2 organizations 101-118 papers each. The productivity of top 15 most productive global organizations in Nipah Virus research varied from 28 to 118 publications and together they contributed 65.11% (769) publication share and 99.15% (32844) citation share during 1999-2018. The scientometric profile of these top 15 organizations is presented in Table 4.

Table 4

Scientometric Profile of Top 15 Most Productive Global Organizations in Nipah Virus Research during 1999-2018.

S. NoName of the OrganizationTPTCCPPHIICP%ICPRCI
1CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia118559747.43419378.811.69
2Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA113591052.30407969.911.86
3University of Malaya, Malaysia73409156.04313041.102.00
4Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA65281543.31304569.231.54
5National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA56260446.50242646.431.66
6University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, USA54172932.02222138.891.14
7University of California at Los Angles, David Geffen School of Medicine, USA39163641.9520923.081.50
8International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Bangladesh39159740.95193897.441.46
9INSERM, France3589825.66181954.290.91
10Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA32137743.03161237.501.53
11Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia31148147.77202580.651.70
12University of Marburg, Germany30110336.77151446.671.31
13EcoHealth Alliance, New York, USA2885630.57142485.711.09
14CNRS Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, France2864623.07101139.290.82
15Universiti Putra Malaya, Malaysia2850418.0012725.000.64
Total of 15 organizations7693284442.7122.1345358.911.52
Total of World11813312728.05
Share of top 15 organizations in World total output65.1199.15

TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; CPP=Citations Per Paper; HI=h-index; ICP=International Collaborative Papers; RCI=Relative Citation Index

  • Five of these organizations registered publications output greater than the group average of 51.27: CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (118 papers), Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (113 papers), University of Malaya, Malaysia (73 papers), Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (65 papers) and National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA (56 papers) during 1999-2018;

  • Seven organizations registered citation impact above the group average of 42.71 citations per publication during 2008-17: University of Malaya, Malaysia (56.04), Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (52.30), Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia (47.77), CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (47.43), National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA (46.50), Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (43.31) and Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA (43.03) during 1999-2018;

  • Six organizations contributed international collaborative publications share above the group average of 56.91%: International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Bangladesh (97.44%), EcoHealth Alliance, New York, USA (85.71%), Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia (80.65%), CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (78.81%), Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (69.91%) and Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (69.23%) during 1999-2018

  • Seven organizations registered the relative citation index above the group average (1.52) of all organizations: University of Malaya, Malaysia (2.0), Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (1.86), Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia(1.70), CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (1.69), National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA (1.66), Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (1.54) and Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA (1.53) during 1999-2018

Profile of Top 15 Most Productive Authors

Five Hundred Fifty six (556) authors participated in global research on Nipah Virus um during 1999-2018, of which 494 authors contributed 1-10 papers each, 2 authors’ 63-84 papers each. The research productivity in the field of Nipah Virus research of top 15 most productive authors varied from 27 to 84 publications. Together they contributed 48.69% (575) global publication share and 89.29% (29579) citation share during 1999-2018. The Scientometric profile of these 15 authors is presented in Table 5.

Table 5

Scientometric Profile of Top 15 Most Productive Authors in Nipah Virus Research during 1999-2018.

S .NoName of the AuthorAffiliation of the AuthorTPTCCPPHIICP%ICPRCI
1L.F. WangCSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia84390246.45347285.711.66
2C.C. BroaderUniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA63265342.11284368.251.50
3B. LeeUniversity of California at Los Angles, David Geffen School of Medicine, USA43166138.63201125.581.38
4P. DaszakConsortium for Conservation Medicine, New York, USA41197248.10223278.051.71
5S.P. LubyInternational Centre for Diarrheal Disease Bangladesh38147338.76183592.111.38
6E.S. GurleyInternational Centre for Diarrheal Disease Bangladesh36138538.47183597.221.37
7T.G. KsiazekCentre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA363651101.42262980.563.62
8H.E. FieldAnimal Research Laboratory, Brsibane, Australia3370721.42212781.820.76
9P.A. RotaCentre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA32208765.22221856.252.33
10G. CrameriCSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia30190863.60232790.002.27
11H.C. AquilarUniversity of California at Los Angles, David Geffen School of Medicine, USA28121043.21161035.711.54
12A.MaisnerUniversity of Marburg, Germany2876827.43141139.290.98
13G.A.MarshCSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia2879028.21141967.861.01
14P.E.RollinCentre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA28207674.14222071.432.64
15K.B.ChuaUniversity of Malaysia, Malaysia273336123.56201659.264.40
  Total of 15 authors5752957951.4421.240570.431.83
  Total of World11813312728.05
Share of top 15 authors in World total output48.6989.29

TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; CPP=Citations Per Paper; HI=h-index; ICP=International Collaborative Papers; RCI=Relative Citation Index

  • Four authors registered publications output above the group average of 38.33: L.F. Wang (84 papers), C.C. Broader (63 papers), B. Lee (43 papers), P. Daszak (41 papers) during 1999-2018;

  • Five authors registered impact above the group average of 51.44 citations per publication: K.B. Chua (123.56), T.G. Ksiazek (1101.42), P.E. Rollin (74.14), P.A. Rota(65.22) and G. Crameri (63.60) during 1999-2018

  • Eight authors contributed international collaborative publications share above the group average of 70.43% of all authors: E.S. Gurley (97.22%), S.P. Luby (92.11%), G. Crameri (90.0%), L.F. Wang (85,71%), H.E. Field (81.82%), T.G.Ksiazek (80.56%), P. Daszak (78.05%), P.E. Rollin (71.43%) during 1999-2018;

  • Five authors registered the relative citation index above the group average (1.83) of all authors: K.B. Chua (4.40), T.G. Ksiazek (3.62), P.E. Rollin (2.64), P.A. Rota (2.33) and G. Crameri (2.27) during 1999-2018.

Medium of Research Communication

Of the total world output on Nipah Virus research, 91.19% (1077) appeared in journals, 4.40% (50) in books, 3.81% (45) in book series and 0.59% (7) in conference proceedings publications during 1999-2018. 1077 journal papers appeared in 410 journals, of which 380 journals published 1-5 papers each, 13 journals 6-10 papers each, 14 journals 11-30 papers each, 2 journals 31-50 papers each and 1 journal 103 papers during 1999-2018. The top 20 most productive journals reported 9 to 33 papers each on Nipah Virus research; together they accounted for 40.39% (435 papers) of total Nipah Virus output published in journals during 1999-2018, shown increase from 35.27% to 43.81% share between 1999-2008 and 2009-18. The top ranking journal is Journal of Virology (with 103 papers), followed by Emerging Infectious Diseases (44 papers), PLOS One (37 papers), Journal of General Virology (25 papers), PLOS Pathogens (22 papers each), etc. during 1999-2018 (Table 6).

Table 6

Top 20 Most Productive Journals in Nipah Virus Research during 1999-2018.

S. NoName of the JournalNumber of Papers
1999-200802009-181999-2018
1Journal of Virology3370103
2Emerging Infectious Diseases222244
3PLOS One23537
4Journal of General Virology81725
5PLOS Pathogens22022
6Virology111021
7Journal of Virological Methods91019
8Virology Journal71118
9Science11516
10Virus Research61016
11Current Opinion in Virology01313
12Neurology Asia21113
13Vaccine21113
14Antiviral Research21012
15Future Virology21012
16Journal of Infectious Diseases8311
17OIE Revue Scientifique Et Technique7411
18Archives of Virology5510
19Proceeding of NAS of USA4610
20Microbes and Infection909
Total of 20 journals152283435
Total global journal output4316461077
Share of top 20 journals in global journal output35.2743.8140.39

Significant Keywords

Around 40 significant keywords have been identified from the literature which through light on the research trends in Nipah Virus research. These keywords are listed in Table 7 in the decreasing order of the frequency of their occurrence in the literature during 1999-2018.

Table 7

List of Significant Keywords in Literature on Global Nipah Virus Research during 1999-2018.

S. NoKeywordFrequencyS. NoKeywordFrequency
1Nipah Virus93021SARS Coronavirus84
2Hendra Virus36022Viral Encephalitis79
3Paramyxoviridae34623Cercopithecus Aethiops75
4Hanipavirus Infection30224Measles Virus75
5Virus Infection25025West Nile Flavivirus70
6Paramyxovirus23426Viruses69
7Virology22927Virus Vaccine63
8Virus Transmission20428HIV Virus58
9Bat20229Rabies Virus57
10Zoonosis19430Swine Diseases55
11Chiroptera16331Influenza Virus49
12Virus Encephalitis14632Coronavirus48
13Swine14233Hantavirus58
14Genetics12034Horse48
15Encephalitis11335Escherichia Coli47
16Viral Antibodies9636Japanese Encephalitis Virus46
17Virus Protein9437Antiviral Activity45
18Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome9138West Nile Virus44
19Emerging Communicable Diseases8639RNA Viruses47
20Ebola Virus8540Dengue40

Highly Cited Papers

A total of 79 highly cited papers were identified in the nipah virus literature, each having 101 to 793 citations (56 papers each in citation range 101-200, 18 papers each in citation range 201-400, 3 papers in citation range 401-500 and 2 paper in citation range 667-793) in 20 years during 1999-2018. Together these 79 papers cumulated a total of 14880 citations, averaging 188.35 citations per paper. Of the 79 highly cited papers, 21 resulted from the participation of research organizations in their role as stand-alone (non-collaborating) institutional authors and remaining 58 from two or more research organizations working in their role as collaborating partners per paper (17 national collaborative and 41 international collaborative). Among 79 highly cited papers, the largest participation was seen from USA (52 papers), followed by the Australia (22 papers), Malaysia (17 papers), France (9 papers), U.K. (8 papers), Bangladesh (7 papers), Canada, Germany and Singapore (4 papers each), Ghana (3 papers)< Cambodia, Canada, China, Denmark, Hong Kong, Madagasagar, Panama, South Africa, Sweden and Switzerland (2 papers each) and 14 other countries including India (1 paper each). These 79 highly cited papers involved the participation of 721 personal authors and 298 research organizations in total across globe. The leading organizations participating in high cited papers were: Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (18 papers), CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (17 papers), University of Malaya (10 papers), Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (7 papers), University of California at Los Angles, David Geffen School of Medicine, USA and International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Bangladesh (6 papers each), National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA and Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA (5 papers each), University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, USA and Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia (4 papers each), University of Marburg, Germany and EcoHealth Alliance, New York, USA (3 papers each), etc. The leading authors participating in high cited papers were: T.G. Ksiazek (13 papers), L. F. Wang (12 papers), K.B. Chua (10 papers), C.C. Broader, P.A. Rota, G. Crameri and P.E. Rollin (7 papers each), B. Lee (6 papers), S.P. Luby, E.S. Gurley and H.C. Aquilar (5 papers each), etc.

Of the 79 highly cited papers, 62 were published as article, 15 as review papers and 2 as conference papers. These 79 highly cited papers were published in 39 journals, with 13 papers in Journal of Virology, 11 papers in Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5 papers in Microbes and Infection, 3 papers in PLOS One, PLOS Pathogens, Proceeding of the NAS of USA and Science, 2 papers each in American Journal of Pathology, Annals of Neurology, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Journal of Comparative Pathology, Lancer, Nature and OIE Revue Scientifique Et Technique and 1 paper each in 26 other journals.

CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY

Research publications (1181 publications) on Nipah virus during the last 20 years (1999-2018) were derived from the Scopus database with a view to study it’s quantitative and qualitative bibliometric characteristics. The publication data showed that the annual output increased from 7 in 1999 to 106 in 2013 and the decreased to 57 in 2017, registering 16.23% annual growth. Its cumulative publication output in ten–years (1999-2008) increased from 458 to 723 publications during succeeding ten-year period 2009-18, registering 57.86% growth. Nipah virus global citation impact averaged to 28.05 citations per paper in 10 years, which decreased from 46.83 to 16.15 from 2008-12 to 2013-17.

Although global research output in the field of Nipah Virus research had originated from 62 countries, however, more than 100% of its global research output and citation share was from just top 10 most productive countries. The top 10 most productive countries global share individually varied widely 4.23% to 45.98% during 1999-2018, with USA accounting for the highest publication share (45.98%), followed by Australia (16.77%), Malaysia (11.09% share) and other 7 countries (from 4.23% to 7.96%) during 1999-2018. The global publication share of these top 10 countries showed increase in USA, France, Bangladesh, India, Germany, Singapore, Canada and U.K. (from 0.10% to 8.77%), as against decrease in Malaysia and Australia (from 1.86% to 8.63%) in ten years period (1999-2008 and 2009-18). Four of top 10 countries scored relative citation index above the world average of 1.28: Malaysia (1.67), Australia (1.47), Bangladesh (1.41) and USA (1.37) during 1999-2018. The international collaborative papers share of top 10 most productive countries in Nipah virus research varied widely from 24.56% (India) to 88.46% (Bangladesh). The other top 8 countries international collaborative publication share varied from 44.27% to 73.74% during 1999-2018.

Medicine was the most sought after subject area of Nipah virus research, accounting for (59.97%) the highest publications share, followed by immunology and microbiology (42.51%), biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (21.25%), agricultural and biological sciences (11.85%), and other 3 sub-fields contribution varying from 4.57% to 6.10% during 1999-2018. Among broad subjects, the research activities registered increase immunology and microbiology, biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology, agricultural and biological sciences, pharmacology, toxicology and pharmaceutics and neurosciences, as against decline of research activity in medicine and veterinary science from 1999-2008 to 2009-18. Agricultural and biological sciences, among various subjects, registered the highest citations impact per paper of 31.16 CPP, followed by immunology and microbiology (29.99), medicine (27.46), neurosciences (26.0) biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (22.26), veterinary science (21.47) and pharmacology, toxicology and pharmaceutics (13.59) during 1999-2018

354 organizations and 556 authors participated in global research on Nipah Virus during 1999-2018, of which the top 15 most productive research organizations and the authors collectively contributed 65.11% and 48.69% global publication share and 99.15% and 89.29% global citation share respectively during 2008-17. The leading organizations in terms of publication productivity were: CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (118 papers), Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (113 papers), University of Malaya, Malaysia (73 papers), Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (65 papers) and National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA (56 papers) during 1999-2018. The leading organizations in terms of citation impact per paper were: University of Malaya, Malaysia (56.04), Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA (52.30), Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia (47.77), CSIRO, Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (47.43), National Institute of Health, Bethesda, USA (46.50), Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, USA (43.31) and Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA during 1999-2018. The leading authors in terms of publication productivity were: L.F. Wang (84 papers), C.C. Broader (63 papers), B. Lee (43 papers), P. Daszak (41 papers) during 1999-2018. The leading authors in terms of citation impact per paper were: K.B. Chua (123.56), T.G. Ksiazek (1101.42), P.E. Rollin (74.14), P.A. Rota (65.22) and G. Crameri (63.60) during 1999-2018.

The journals medium (1077 articles published in 410 journals) ) accounted for 91.19% global publications share in Nipah virus research with top 20 most productive journals accounting for 40.39% of total publications output in journals during 1999-2018. Journal of Virology contributed the largest number of papers (103 papers), followed Emerging Infectious Diseases (44 papers), PLOS One (37 papers), Journal of General Virology (25 papers), PLOS Pathogens (22 papers each), etc. during 1999-2018

Of the total Nipah virus global research output, 79 publications registered high citations, in the range of 101-793 citations per paper and collectively these highly cited papers received a total of 114880 citations, averaging to 188.35 citations per paper. These 79 highly cited papers involved the participation of 721 personal authors and 298 research organizations and were published in 39 journals, with 13 papers in Journal of Virology, 11 papers in Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5 papers in Microbes and Infection, 3 papers in PLOS One, PLOS Pathogens, Proceeding of the NAS of USA and Science, 2 papers each in American Journal of Pathology, Annals of Neurology, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Journal of Comparative Pathology, Lancer, Nature and OIE Revue Scientifique Et Technique and 1 paper each in 26 other journals

WHO in collaboration and consultation with leading national and international experts and organizations and other key stakeholders is developing a Nipah Research and Development (RandD) Roadmap. The main purpose of this roadmap is to provide a framework for identifying the vision, underpinning strategic goals, and prioritizing areas and activities (from basic research to advanced development, licensure, manufacture and deployment) for accelerating the collaborative development of medical countermeasures (MCMs)— diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines—against Nipah virus infection. The RandD roadmap for NiV infection is a key component of the WHO RandD Blueprint initiative for accelerating research and product development of medical countermeasures to enable effective and timely emergency response to infectious disease epidemics. NiV is identified in the Blueprint’s list of “priority pathogens” (defined as pathogens that are likely to cause severe outbreaks in the near future and for which few or no MCMs exist). Other aspects of public health preparedness and response, in addition to RandD for MCMs, are critical to successful NiV infection prevention and control. Examples include enhanced surveillance systems, minimizing zoonotic NiV transmission, improved personal protective equipment (PPE), effective community engagement, adequate infection prevention and control practices, and workforce development and training in endemic and at-risk regions. Many of these issues are beyond the scope of the RandD roadmap, but need to be addressed as part of a broader public health control strategy.

REFERENCES

1 

Pierre RE , author. Nipah Virus Disease. In. Emerging Infectious Diseases. Clinical Case Studies. 2014. p. 175 –84. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-416975-3.00013-3

2 

Decoding the deadly Nipah virus by Preeti Zachariah , author. 2018 http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/health/decoding-the-deadly-nipah-virus/article24011196.ece 30– May. 2018

3 

Denis M , author. NIPAH Baseline Situation Analysis. 2018 http://www.who.int/blueprint/priority-diseases/key-action/WHO_NIPAH_baseline_situation_analysis_27Jan2018.pdf?ua=1 30– May. 2018

4 

WHO. , author. Nipah virus-Key Facts. 2018 http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/nipah-virus 30– May. 2018

5 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDS) , author. Nipah Virus (NiV). 2014 https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/nipah/index.html 30– May. 2018

6 

Safahieh H, Sanni SA, Zainab AN , authors. International Contribution to Nipah Virus Research 1999-2010. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information. 2012; 17 (3): 35 –47