METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to include all relevant published MS/ NMOSD studies in the SEA indexed in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and CENTRAL from the inception of these databases to August 1, 2019. Quantity of research productivity was measured in terms of the total published documents. Quality of research impact was evaluated by assessing the study designs of the published reports, publications in journals with impact factor (IF) and PlumX Metrics (citations, usage, captures, mentions and social medias). Population size, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, percentage (%) of GDP allocated to research and development (R&D), and the total number of neurologists reported in each country were obtained from reliable published data.
RESULTS: Out of 3,547 articles identified, only 142 articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria; therefore, the total number of publications in the SEA region related to MS/ NMOSD was deemed low in quantity. Most studies were cross-sectional and case reports/ series; hence, most studies offered low level of evidence. Since the aggregate scores in citations, usage, captures, mentions, and social medias in PlumX Metrics and publications in journals with IF were low, the overall quality of the published articles was considered low. Thailand (57 articles), Malaysia (40) and Singapore (29) contributed to the majority of publications on the topic-. GDP per capita was statistically correlated with usage. Percent GDP for R&D was positively correlated with total publications, usage, captures and social mediaindices.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the scientific impact of MS/ NMOSD in the SEA was considered low in quantity and quality. This study must encourage researchers in the SEA to produce greater volumes of high-quality publications in this particular field and motivate governments to increase % GDP for R&D for the benefit of patients suffering fromthese rare and disabling conditions.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted for articles published from January 1990 to December 2009 in PubMed/MEDLINE using terms for malaria and 11 target countries (Bhutan, China, North Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vanuatu). The references were collated and categorized according to subject, Plasmodium species, and whether they contained original or derivative data.
RESULTS: 2,700 articles published between 1990 and 2009 related to malaria in the target countries. The annual output of malaria-related papers increased linearly whereas the overall biomedical output from these countries grew exponentially. The percentage of malaria-related publications was nearly 3% (111/3741) of all biomedical publications in 1992 and decreased to less than 1% (118/12171; p < 0.001) in 2009. Thailand had the highest absolute output of malaria-related papers (n = 1211), followed by China (n = 609) and Indonesia (n = 346). Solomon Islands and Vanuatu had lower absolute numbers of publications, but both countries had the highest number of publications per capita (1.3 and 2.5 papers/1,000 population). The largest percentage of papers concerned the epidemiology and control of malaria (53%) followed by studies of drugs and drug resistance (47%). There was an increase in the proportion of articles relating to epidemiology, entomology, biology, molecular biology, pathophysiology and diagnostics from the first to the second decade, whereas the percentage of papers on drugs, clinical aspects of malaria, immunology, and social sciences decreased.
CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of malaria-related publications out of the overall biomedical output from the 11 target Asian-Pacific countries is decreasing. The discovery and evaluation of new, safe and effective drugs and vaccines is paramount. In addition the elimination of malaria will require operational research to implement and scale up interventions.
METHODS: A 20-item questionnaire was distributed online to medical professors of a Saudi, Malaysian and a Pakistani medical school. The participants were instructed to select their responses on a 5-point Likert's scale and the collected data was analyzed for quantitative and qualitative results.
RESULTS: Of 161, 110 responded; response rate of 68.3%. About 35% professors spent 1-4 hours and 2% spent 19-25 hours per week for research. As many as 7% did not publish a single article and 29% had published 10 or more articles after attaining professor rank. During the last two years, 44% professors had published 5 or more research articles. Majority pointed out a lack of research support and funds, administrative burden and difficulty in data collection as the main obstacles to their research.
CONCLUSIONS: This research has identified time constraints and insufficient support for research as key barriers to medical professors' research productivity. Financial and technical support and lesser administrative work load are some suggested remedies to foster the professors' research output.