f1000research.com
Open in
urlscan Pro
52.17.225.167
Public Scan
URL:
https://f1000research.com/articles/11-155/v3
Submission: On September 17 via manual from ZA — Scanned from DE
Submission: On September 17 via manual from ZA — Scanned from DE
Form analysis 10 forms found in the DOM
/search
<form action="/search" class="-navbar__secondary u-mr--2 c-search-form js-search-form u-hide u-show@navbar">
<label for="searchInput" class="c-search-form__label _mdl-layout">
<input name="q" type="search" class="c-search-form__input" id="searchInput" placeholder="Search">
<button type="submit" class="c-search-form__submit mdl-button mdl-js-button mdl-button--icon" data-upgraded=",MaterialButton"><i class="material-icons">search</i></button>
</label>
</form>/search
<form action="/search" class="c-search-form js-search-form">
<label for="navbar_mob_search_input" class="c-search-form__label _mdl-layout">
<input id="navbar_mob_search_input" name="q" type="search" class="c-search-form__input" placeholder="Search">
<button type="submit" class="c-search-form__submit mdl-button mdl-js-button mdl-button--icon" data-upgraded=",MaterialButton"><i class="material-icons">search</i></button>
</label>
</form>POST #
<form class="js-email-alert-signup" action="#" method="POST" data-email="tocAlertWeekly"> <input type="hidden" name="isUserLoggedIn" class="js-email-alert-signup-logged-in" value="N"> <input type="hidden" name="userId"
class="js-email-alert-signup-user-id" value=""> <input type="hidden" name="frequency" class="js-email-alert-signup-frequency" value="WEEKLY">
<div class="o-actions o-actions--middle">
<div class="o-actions__primary"> <input type="email" name="emailAddress" class="form-input-field js-email-alert-signup-address u-1/1 u-bb" required="required" placeholder="Email"> </div>
<div class="o-actions__secondary">
<div class="_mdl-layout u-ml--1/2"> <button class="mdl-button mdl-js-button mdl-button--colored mdl-button--small mdl-button--filled js-email-alert-signup-submit" data-upgraded=",MaterialButton">Sign Up</button> </div>
</div>
</div>
</form><form class="research-layout registration-form u-mb--2 comment-affiliations-form js-affiliations-form" id="comment_affiliation_1">
<div class="u-mb--1 u-mt--2"> <strong>Affiliation</strong> </div> <input type="hidden" class="js-affiliation-id" value="">
<div class="form-field c-affiliation-clear-wrapper"> <input type="text" id="comment_affiliation_1_institution" name="institution" class="form-input-field check-xss js-affiliation-institution ui-autocomplete-input" placeholder="Institution *"
autocomplete="off" role="textbox" aria-autocomplete="list" aria-haspopup="true"> <a class="c-affiliation-clear">✕</a>
<div class="form-error-message-js space-above space-below">
<div class="o-flex o-flex--space-between o-flex--cross-center _mdl-layout">
<div class="o-flex__item"> <span class="message"></span> </div>
<div class="o-flex__item"> <button type="button" class="mdl-button mdl-js-button mdl-js-ripple-effect mdl-button--icon mdl-button--mini-icon mdl-button--secondary" data-enabled-title="Click to retry search"
data-upgraded=",MaterialButton,MaterialRipple"> <i class="material-icons">refresh</i> <span class="mdl-button__ripple-container"><span class="mdl-ripple"></span></span></button> </div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="default-error margin-top is-hidden comment-enter-institution institution">Please enter your institution.</div> <input type="hidden" class="js-affiliation-institution-id" value="">
</div>
<div class="margin-top margin-bottom">
<i><b>Note:</b> To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered.</i>
</div>
<div class="form-field c-affiliation-clear-wrapper"> <input id="comment_affiliation_1_department" type="text" name="department" class="form-input-field check-xss js-affiliation-department" placeholder="Department">
<a class="c-affiliation-clear">✕</a>
<div class="form-error-message-js space-above space-below">
<div class="o-flex o-flex--space-between o-flex--cross-center _mdl-layout">
<div class="o-flex__item"> <span class="message"></span> </div>
<div class="o-flex__item"> <button type="button" class="mdl-button mdl-js-button mdl-js-ripple-effect mdl-button--icon mdl-button--mini-icon mdl-button--secondary" data-enabled-title="Click to retry search"
data-upgraded=",MaterialButton,MaterialRipple"> <i class="material-icons">refresh</i> <span class="mdl-button__ripple-container"><span class="mdl-ripple"></span></span></button> </div>
</div>
</div> <input type="hidden" class="js-affiliation-department-id" value="">
</div>
<div class="form-field"> <input type="text" name="place" class="form-input-field check-xss js-add-comment-place" placeholder="Town/City"> </div>
<div class="form-field"> <input type="text" name="state" class="form-input-field check-xss js-add-comment-state" placeholder="State"> </div>
<div class="form-field">
<div class="form-input-wrapper hundred-percent-wide">
<div class="new-select-standard-wrapper inline-display heading10"> <select name="countryCode" class="form-select-menu hundred-percent-wide js-add-comment-country">
<option value="-1">Country/Region *</option>
<option value="US" data-country-code="US">USA</option>
<option value="GB" data-country-code="GB">UK</option>
<option value="CA" data-country-code="CA">Canada</option>
<option value="CN" data-country-code="CN">China</option>
<option value="FR" data-country-code="FR">France</option>
<option value="DE" data-country-code="DE">Germany</option>
<optgroup label="-------------------------"></optgroup>
<option value="AF" data-country-code="AF">Afghanistan</option>
<option value="AX" data-country-code="AX">Aland Islands</option>
<option value="AL" data-country-code="AL">Albania</option>
<option value="DZ" data-country-code="DZ">Algeria</option>
<option value="AS" data-country-code="AS">American Samoa</option>
<option value="AD" data-country-code="AD">Andorra</option>
<option value="AO" data-country-code="AO">Angola</option>
<option value="AI" data-country-code="AI">Anguilla</option>
<option value="AQ" data-country-code="AQ">Antarctica</option>
<option value="AG" data-country-code="AG">Antigua and Barbuda</option>
<option value="AR" data-country-code="AR">Argentina</option>
<option value="AM" data-country-code="AM">Armenia</option>
<option value="AW" data-country-code="AW">Aruba</option>
<option value="AU" data-country-code="AU">Australia</option>
<option value="AT" data-country-code="AT">Austria</option>
<option value="AZ" data-country-code="AZ">Azerbaijan</option>
<option value="BS" data-country-code="BS">Bahamas</option>
<option value="BH" data-country-code="BH">Bahrain</option>
<option value="BD" data-country-code="BD">Bangladesh</option>
<option value="BB" data-country-code="BB">Barbados</option>
<option value="BY" data-country-code="BY">Belarus</option>
<option value="BE" data-country-code="BE">Belgium</option>
<option value="BZ" data-country-code="BZ">Belize</option>
<option value="BJ" data-country-code="BJ">Benin</option>
<option value="BM" data-country-code="BM">Bermuda</option>
<option value="BT" data-country-code="BT">Bhutan</option>
<option value="BO" data-country-code="BO">Bolivia</option>
<option value="BA" data-country-code="BA">Bosnia and Herzegovina</option>
<option value="BW" data-country-code="BW">Botswana</option>
<option value="BV" data-country-code="BV">Bouvet Island</option>
<option value="BR" data-country-code="BR">Brazil</option>
<option value="IO" data-country-code="IO">British Indian Ocean Territory</option>
<option value="VG" data-country-code="VG">British Virgin Islands</option>
<option value="BN" data-country-code="BN">Brunei</option>
<option value="BG" data-country-code="BG">Bulgaria</option>
<option value="BF" data-country-code="BF">Burkina Faso</option>
<option value="BI" data-country-code="BI">Burundi</option>
<option value="KH" data-country-code="KH">Cambodia</option>
<option value="CM" data-country-code="CM">Cameroon</option>
<option value="CA" data-country-code="CA">Canada</option>
<option value="CV" data-country-code="CV">Cape Verde</option>
<option value="KY" data-country-code="KY">Cayman Islands</option>
<option value="CF" data-country-code="CF">Central African Republic</option>
<option value="TD" data-country-code="TD">Chad</option>
<option value="CL" data-country-code="CL">Chile</option>
<option value="CN" data-country-code="CN">China</option>
<option value="CX" data-country-code="CX">Christmas Island</option>
<option value="CC" data-country-code="CC">Cocos (Keeling) Islands</option>
<option value="CO" data-country-code="CO">Colombia</option>
<option value="KM" data-country-code="KM">Comoros</option>
<option value="CG" data-country-code="CG">Congo</option>
<option value="CK" data-country-code="CK">Cook Islands</option>
<option value="CR" data-country-code="CR">Costa Rica</option>
<option value="CI" data-country-code="CI">Cote d'Ivoire</option>
<option value="HR" data-country-code="HR">Croatia</option>
<option value="CU" data-country-code="CU">Cuba</option>
<option value="CY" data-country-code="CY">Cyprus</option>
<option value="CZ" data-country-code="CZ">Czech Republic</option>
<option value="CD" data-country-code="CD">Democratic Republic of the Congo</option>
<option value="DK" data-country-code="DK">Denmark</option>
<option value="DJ" data-country-code="DJ">Djibouti</option>
<option value="DM" data-country-code="DM">Dominica</option>
<option value="DO" data-country-code="DO">Dominican Republic</option>
<option value="EC" data-country-code="EC">Ecuador</option>
<option value="EG" data-country-code="EG">Egypt</option>
<option value="SV" data-country-code="SV">El Salvador</option>
<option value="GQ" data-country-code="GQ">Equatorial Guinea</option>
<option value="ER" data-country-code="ER">Eritrea</option>
<option value="EE" data-country-code="EE">Estonia</option>
<option value="ET" data-country-code="ET">Ethiopia</option>
<option value="FK" data-country-code="FK">Falkland Islands</option>
<option value="FO" data-country-code="FO">Faroe Islands</option>
<option value="FM" data-country-code="FM">Federated States of Micronesia</option>
<option value="FJ" data-country-code="FJ">Fiji</option>
<option value="FI" data-country-code="FI">Finland</option>
<option value="FR" data-country-code="FR">France</option>
<option value="GF" data-country-code="GF">French Guiana</option>
<option value="PF" data-country-code="PF">French Polynesia</option>
<option value="TF" data-country-code="TF">French Southern Territories</option>
<option value="GA" data-country-code="GA">Gabon</option>
<option value="GE" data-country-code="GE">Georgia</option>
<option value="DE" data-country-code="DE">Germany</option>
<option value="GH" data-country-code="GH">Ghana</option>
<option value="GI" data-country-code="GI">Gibraltar</option>
<option value="GR" data-country-code="GR">Greece</option>
<option value="GL" data-country-code="GL">Greenland</option>
<option value="GD" data-country-code="GD">Grenada</option>
<option value="GP" data-country-code="GP">Guadeloupe</option>
<option value="GU" data-country-code="GU">Guam</option>
<option value="GT" data-country-code="GT">Guatemala</option>
<option value="GG" data-country-code="GG">Guernsey</option>
<option value="GN" data-country-code="GN">Guinea</option>
<option value="GW" data-country-code="GW">Guinea-Bissau</option>
<option value="GY" data-country-code="GY">Guyana</option>
<option value="HT" data-country-code="HT">Haiti</option>
<option value="HM" data-country-code="HM">Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands</option>
<option value="VA" data-country-code="VA">Holy See (Vatican City State)</option>
<option value="HN" data-country-code="HN">Honduras</option>
<option value="HK" data-country-code="HK">Hong Kong</option>
<option value="HU" data-country-code="HU">Hungary</option>
<option value="IS" data-country-code="IS">Iceland</option>
<option value="IN" data-country-code="IN">India</option>
<option value="ID" data-country-code="ID">Indonesia</option>
<option value="IR" data-country-code="IR">Iran</option>
<option value="IQ" data-country-code="IQ">Iraq</option>
<option value="IE" data-country-code="IE">Ireland</option>
<option value="IL" data-country-code="IL">Israel</option>
<option value="IT" data-country-code="IT">Italy</option>
<option value="JM" data-country-code="JM">Jamaica</option>
<option value="JP" data-country-code="JP">Japan</option>
<option value="JE" data-country-code="JE">Jersey</option>
<option value="JO" data-country-code="JO">Jordan</option>
<option value="KZ" data-country-code="KZ">Kazakhstan</option>
<option value="KE" data-country-code="KE">Kenya</option>
<option value="KI" data-country-code="KI">Kiribati</option>
<option value="XK" data-country-code="XK">Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro)</option>
<option value="KW" data-country-code="KW">Kuwait</option>
<option value="KG" data-country-code="KG">Kyrgyzstan</option>
<option value="LA" data-country-code="LA">Lao People's Democratic Republic</option>
<option value="LV" data-country-code="LV">Latvia</option>
<option value="LB" data-country-code="LB">Lebanon</option>
<option value="LS" data-country-code="LS">Lesotho</option>
<option value="LR" data-country-code="LR">Liberia</option>
<option value="LY" data-country-code="LY">Libya</option>
<option value="LI" data-country-code="LI">Liechtenstein</option>
<option value="LT" data-country-code="LT">Lithuania</option>
<option value="LU" data-country-code="LU">Luxembourg</option>
<option value="MO" data-country-code="MO">Macao</option>
<option value="MG" data-country-code="MG">Madagascar</option>
<option value="MW" data-country-code="MW">Malawi</option>
<option value="MY" data-country-code="MY">Malaysia</option>
<option value="MV" data-country-code="MV">Maldives</option>
<option value="ML" data-country-code="ML">Mali</option>
<option value="MT" data-country-code="MT">Malta</option>
<option value="MH" data-country-code="MH">Marshall Islands</option>
<option value="MQ" data-country-code="MQ">Martinique</option>
<option value="MR" data-country-code="MR">Mauritania</option>
<option value="MU" data-country-code="MU">Mauritius</option>
<option value="YT" data-country-code="YT">Mayotte</option>
<option value="MX" data-country-code="MX">Mexico</option>
<option value="UM" data-country-code="UM">Minor Outlying Islands of the United States</option>
<option value="MD" data-country-code="MD">Moldova</option>
<option value="MC" data-country-code="MC">Monaco</option>
<option value="MN" data-country-code="MN">Mongolia</option>
<option value="ME" data-country-code="ME">Montenegro</option>
<option value="MS" data-country-code="MS">Montserrat</option>
<option value="MA" data-country-code="MA">Morocco</option>
<option value="MZ" data-country-code="MZ">Mozambique</option>
<option value="MM" data-country-code="MM">Myanmar</option>
<option value="NA" data-country-code="NA">Namibia</option>
<option value="NR" data-country-code="NR">Nauru</option>
<option value="NP" data-country-code="NP">Nepal</option>
<option value="AN" data-country-code="AN">Netherlands Antilles</option>
<option value="NC" data-country-code="NC">New Caledonia</option>
<option value="NZ" data-country-code="NZ">New Zealand</option>
<option value="NI" data-country-code="NI">Nicaragua</option>
<option value="NE" data-country-code="NE">Niger</option>
<option value="NG" data-country-code="NG">Nigeria</option>
<option value="NU" data-country-code="NU">Niue</option>
<option value="NF" data-country-code="NF">Norfolk Island</option>
<option value="KP" data-country-code="KP">North Korea</option>
<option value="MK" data-country-code="MK">North Macedonia</option>
<option value="MP" data-country-code="MP">Northern Mariana Islands</option>
<option value="NO" data-country-code="NO">Norway</option>
<option value="OM" data-country-code="OM">Oman</option>
<option value="PK" data-country-code="PK">Pakistan</option>
<option value="PW" data-country-code="PW">Palau</option>
<option value="PS" data-country-code="PS">Palestinian Territory</option>
<option value="PA" data-country-code="PA">Panama</option>
<option value="PG" data-country-code="PG">Papua New Guinea</option>
<option value="PY" data-country-code="PY">Paraguay</option>
<option value="PE" data-country-code="PE">Peru</option>
<option value="PH" data-country-code="PH">Philippines</option>
<option value="PN" data-country-code="PN">Pitcairn</option>
<option value="PL" data-country-code="PL">Poland</option>
<option value="PT" data-country-code="PT">Portugal</option>
<option value="PR" data-country-code="PR">Puerto Rico</option>
<option value="QA" data-country-code="QA">Qatar</option>
<option value="RE" data-country-code="RE">Reunion</option>
<option value="RO" data-country-code="RO">Romania</option>
<option value="RU" data-country-code="RU">Russian Federation</option>
<option value="RW" data-country-code="RW">Rwanda</option>
<option value="SH" data-country-code="SH">Saint Helena</option>
<option value="KN" data-country-code="KN">Saint Kitts and Nevis</option>
<option value="LC" data-country-code="LC">Saint Lucia</option>
<option value="PM" data-country-code="PM">Saint Pierre and Miquelon</option>
<option value="VC" data-country-code="VC">Saint Vincent and the Grenadines</option>
<option value="WS" data-country-code="WS">Samoa</option>
<option value="SM" data-country-code="SM">San Marino</option>
<option value="ST" data-country-code="ST">Sao Tome and Principe</option>
<option value="SA" data-country-code="SA">Saudi Arabia</option>
<option value="SN" data-country-code="SN">Senegal</option>
<option value="RS" data-country-code="RS">Serbia</option>
<option value="SC" data-country-code="SC">Seychelles</option>
<option value="SL" data-country-code="SL">Sierra Leone</option>
<option value="SG" data-country-code="SG">Singapore</option>
<option value="SK" data-country-code="SK">Slovakia</option>
<option value="SI" data-country-code="SI">Slovenia</option>
<option value="SB" data-country-code="SB">Solomon Islands</option>
<option value="SO" data-country-code="SO">Somalia</option>
<option value="ZA" data-country-code="ZA">South Africa</option>
<option value="GS" data-country-code="GS">South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is</option>
<option value="KR" data-country-code="KR">South Korea</option>
<option value="SS" data-country-code="SS">South Sudan</option>
<option value="ES" data-country-code="ES">Spain</option>
<option value="LK" data-country-code="LK">Sri Lanka</option>
<option value="SD" data-country-code="SD">Sudan</option>
<option value="SR" data-country-code="SR">Suriname</option>
<option value="SJ" data-country-code="SJ">Svalbard and Jan Mayen</option>
<option value="SZ" data-country-code="SZ">Swaziland</option>
<option value="SE" data-country-code="SE">Sweden</option>
<option value="CH" data-country-code="CH">Switzerland</option>
<option value="SY" data-country-code="SY">Syria</option>
<option value="TW" data-country-code="TW">Taiwan</option>
<option value="TJ" data-country-code="TJ">Tajikistan</option>
<option value="TZ" data-country-code="TZ">Tanzania</option>
<option value="TH" data-country-code="TH">Thailand</option>
<option value="GM" data-country-code="GM">The Gambia</option>
<option value="NL" data-country-code="NL">The Netherlands</option>
<option value="TL" data-country-code="TL">Timor-Leste</option>
<option value="TG" data-country-code="TG">Togo</option>
<option value="TK" data-country-code="TK">Tokelau</option>
<option value="TO" data-country-code="TO">Tonga</option>
<option value="TT" data-country-code="TT">Trinidad and Tobago</option>
<option value="TN" data-country-code="TN">Tunisia</option>
<option value="TR" data-country-code="TR">Turkey</option>
<option value="TM" data-country-code="TM">Turkmenistan</option>
<option value="TC" data-country-code="TC">Turks and Caicos Islands</option>
<option value="TV" data-country-code="TV">Tuvalu</option>
<option value="GB" data-country-code="GB">UK</option>
<option value="US" data-country-code="US">USA</option>
<option value="UG" data-country-code="UG">Uganda</option>
<option value="UA" data-country-code="UA">Ukraine</option>
<option value="AE" data-country-code="AE">United Arab Emirates</option>
<option value="VI" data-country-code="VI">United States Virgin Islands</option>
<option value="UY" data-country-code="UY">Uruguay</option>
<option value="UZ" data-country-code="UZ">Uzbekistan</option>
<option value="VU" data-country-code="VU">Vanuatu</option>
<option value="VE" data-country-code="VE">Venezuela</option>
<option value="VN" data-country-code="VN">Vietnam</option>
<option value="WF" data-country-code="WF">Wallis and Futuna</option>
<option value="ZZ" data-country-code="ZZ">West Bank and Gaza Strip</option>
<option value="EH" data-country-code="EH">Western Sahara</option>
<option value="YE" data-country-code="YE">Yemen</option>
<option value="ZM" data-country-code="ZM">Zambia</option>
<option value="ZW" data-country-code="ZW">Zimbabwe</option>
</select> </div>
</div>
<div class="default-error margin-top is-hidden comment-enter-country country">Please select your country/region.</div>
</div>
</form>POST https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check
<form action="https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check" id="googleOAuth" method="post" target="_top">
<input class="target-field" type="hidden" name="target" value="/articles/11-155/v3">
<input id="google-remember-me" name="_spring_security_oauth_remember_me" type="hidden" value="true">
<input id="system-google" name="system" type="hidden" value="GOOGLE">
</form>POST https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check
<form action="https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check" id="ECAuth" method="post" target="_top">
<input class="target-field" type="hidden" name="target" value="/articles/11-155/v3">
<input id="ec-remember-me" name="_spring_security_oauth_remember_me" type="hidden" value="true">
<input id="system-ec" name="system" type="hidden" value="EC">
</form>POST https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check
<form action="https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check" id="facebookOAuth" method="post" target="_top">
<input class="target-field" type="hidden" name="target" value="/articles/11-155/v3">
<input id="facebook-remember-me" name="_spring_security_oauth_remember_me" type="hidden" value="true">
<input id="system-fb" name="system" type="hidden" value="FACEBOOK">
</form>POST https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check
<form action="https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check" id="orcidOAuth" method="post" target="_top">
<input class="target-field" type="hidden" name="target" value="/articles/11-155/v3">
<input id="orcid-remember-me" name="_spring_security_oauth_remember_me" type="hidden" value="true">
<input id="system-orcid" name="system" type="hidden" value="ORCID">
</form>Name: f — POST https://f1000research.com/login
<form id="sign-in-form" class="login-container" action="https://f1000research.com/login" method="post" name="f">
<div id="sign-in-form-gfb-popup">
<div class="sign-in-form-top">
<div class="sign-in-form-title">SIGN IN</div>
<div class="sign-in-form-google"> </div>
<div class="sign-in-form-facebook"> </div>
<div class="sign-in-form-ec"> </div>
<div class="sign-in-form-text">By proceeding you agree to F1000’s<br><a href="/about/legal/termsandconditions" target="_blank" title="General Terms and Conditions">General Terms and Conditions</a><br>
<div class="sign-in-form-divider float-left"> </div>
<div class="sign-in-form-divider-text">OR</div>
<div class="sign-in-form-divider float-left"> </div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
<input class="target-field" type="hidden" name="target" value="/articles/11-155/v3">
<input type="text" name="username" id="signin-email-box" class="sign-in-input" placeholder="Email address" autocomplete="email">
<input type="password" name="password" id="signin-password-box" class="sign-in-input" placeholder="Password" autocomplete="current-password">
<div class="sign-in-remember">
<div class="checkbox-wrapper">
<input type="checkbox" id="remember-me" name="remember_me" class="checkbox is-hidden">
</div>
<span class="checkbox-label">Remember me</span>
</div>
<a href="#" class="sign-in-link" id="forgot-password-link">Forgotten your password?</a>
<div class="sign-in-button-container margin-top margin-left-20 margin-bottom">
<button type="submit" id="sign-in-button" class="sign-in-buttons general-white-orange-button">Sign In</button>
<button type="button" id="sign-in-cancel" class="sign-in-buttons sign-in-cancel-button margin-left">Cancel</button>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
<div class="sign-in-error">Email or password not correct. Please try again</div>
<div class="sign-in-loading">Please wait...</div>
</form>POST https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check
<form action="https://f1000research.com/j_spring_oauth_security_check" id="oAuthForm" method="post" target="_top">
<input class="target-field" type="hidden" name="target" value="/articles/11-155/v3">
<input id="oAuthSystem" name="system" type="hidden">
</form>Text Content
search
file_uploadSubmit your research
search menu close
search
* Browse
* Gateways & Collections
* How to Publish
* Submit your Research
* My Submissions
* Article Guidelines
* Article Guidelines (New Versions)
* Data Guidelines
* Posters and Slides Guidelines
* Document Guidelines
* Article Processing Charges
* Peer Review
* Finding Article Reviewers
* About
* How it Works
* For Reviewers
* Our Advisors
* Policies
* Glossary
* FAQs
* For Developers
* Newsroom
* Contact
* My Research
* Submissions
* Content and Tracking Alerts
* My Details
* Sign In
file_uploadSubmit your research
Home Browse Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric analysis of
occupational...
ALL Metrics
2005
Views
199
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
How to cite this article
Sau K and Nayak Y. Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric analysis of
occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer review: 1
approved]. F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.3)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the
title is included in all citations of this article.
Close Copy Citation Details
Export
Export Citation
Sciwheel
EndNote
Ref. Manager
Bibtex
ProCite
Sente
EXPORT
Select a format first
Track
Share
▬
✚
Research Article
Revised
SCOPUS BASED BIBLIOMETRIC AND SCIENTOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY
PUBLICATIONS FROM 2001 TO 2020
[version 3; peer review: 1 approved]
Koushik Sau1, Yogendra Nayak
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0508-1394
2
Koushik Sau1, Yogendra Nayak
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0508-1394
2
PUBLISHED 22 Jun 2023
Author details Author details
1 Department of Occupational Therapy, Manipal College of Health Professions,
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 576104, India
2 Department of Pharmacology, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences,
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 576104, India
Koushik Sau
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation,
Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation
Yogendra Nayak
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation,
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS
REVIEWER STATUS
This article is included in the Research on Research, Policy & Culture gateway.
This article is included in the Manipal Academy of Higher Education gateway.
ABSTRACT
Background: Occupational therapy (OT) is one of the allied health professions,
with its first journals in 1920. The main objective of this study was to find
out the publication trend in the field of OT research for the period of
2001-2020 using the principles of bibliometrics and scientometrics.
Methods: The data was retrieved from Scopus from the past 20 years (2001-2020).
VOSviewer software was used to find year-wise publications in OT-specific and
non-OT-specific Journals along with top journals, countries, organisations,
authors, cited articles, and highly used keywords.
Results: There was a steady growth of OT articles over the past 20 years. Scopus
indexes 16 OT-specific journals are identified. American Journal of Occupational
Therapy, British Journal of Occupational Therapy Journal, Australian
Occupational Therapy Journal, Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, and
Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy are the leading publications and
citations. A comparison of OT-specific and non-OT journals inferred that the
OT-specific papers are three times more published in non-OT journals. There is a
trend in publishing multidisciplinary medical journals than OT journals. The US
publishes the most articles, followed by the UK, Australia, Canada, and Germany.
Though the US alone produced a considerable number of articles (9517), only five
organisations are listed in the top 20, compared to Canada (n=6) and Australia
(n=5). Australia represents the highest number of published authors (n=11/20).
Canada represents a highly cited author from the top-cited publications. The
five common keywords used by OT-authors are "occupational therapy",
“rehabilitation”, “stroke”, “physical therapy,” and “activities of daily
living”. This study lists top-20 journals along with their CiteScore and Journal
Impact Factor.
Conclusions: This study will help the budding researchers in OT to select a
suitable quality journal for publication and, further, helpful for research
promotion, researcher incentivising, grant allocations, and policymakers in the
OT field.
READ ALL READ LESS
KEYWORDS
Occupational therapy, occupational therapy journals, core journals, citations
metrics, Scopus, VOSviewer
Corresponding Author(s)
Yogendra Nayak (yogendra.nayak@manipal.edu)
Close
Corresponding author: Yogendra Nayak
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in
supporting this work.
Copyright: © 2023 Sau K and Nayak Y. This is an open access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
How to cite: Sau K and Nayak Y. Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric
analysis of occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer
review: 1 approved]. F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.3) First published: 08 Feb 2022,
11:155 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.1) Latest published: 22
Jun 2023, 11:155 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.3)
REVISED AMENDMENTS FROM VERSION 2
There was error in writing abbreviation of low- and middle-income countries
(LMIC). The term LIMC is replaced with LMIC in the whole of revised manuscript.
There was error in writing abbreviation of low- and middle-income countries
(LMIC). The term LIMC is replaced with LMIC in the whole of revised manuscript.
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Sureshkumar Kamalakannan
READ REVIEWER RESPONSES
INTRODUCTION
Occupational therapy (OT) is one of the allied health professions practiced
globally. Research and research publications are an integral part of the OT
profession. “Archives of Occupational Therapy” was the first published OT
journal published in 1922 (Cruz et al., 2019). In the 21st century, most
journals became online web-based after the invention of the internet (Cruz et
al., 2019). Thirty-nine journals have been published that contain “occupational
therapy” in journal-title available online. Thirty-two journals are published in
English (Cruz et al., 2019). These journals are core OT journal that mainly
publishes OT-related articles. With the advancement in electronic databases and
the online availability of periodicals, the newer bibliometrics and
scientometrics methods of journal evaluation or evaluation of research measures
are evolved (Meho and Yang, 2006). Citation analysis and content analysis are
two commonly used methods of bibliometric analysis (Wallin 2005; T. Brown,
Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018). This method is proven to examine the impact or
influence of published articles, journals, researchers, institutions, and
countries. Further, this method evaluates micro-level performance, such as
institution/university performance, to macro-level performance of a particular
profession in research and country-wise research evaluation (Wallin 2005; T.
Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al. 2018).
Content and citation analysis is a common practice in the bibliometrics of
occupational therapy. In the past, most of the content analysis was performed
for specific OT journals such as the American Journal of Occupational Therapy
(AJOT) (Ottenbacher and Short, 1982; Ottenbacher and Petersen, 1985), Canadian
Journal of Occupational Therapy (CJOT) (Ernest, 1983), Australian Occupational
Therapy Journal (AOTJ) (Trevan-Hawke, 1986; Madill et al., 1989), British
Journal of Occupational Therapy Journal (BJOT) (Cusick, 1995; Mountain 1997) and
Occupational Therapy Journal of Research (OTJR) (G. T. Brown and Brown, 2005).
Pearl et al. (2014) evaluated and reported the content of five occupational
therapy journals: AJOT, AOTJ, BJOT, CJOT, and the Scandinavian Journal of
Occupational Therapy (SJOT).
Most of the reported studies were based on the cited journal analysis, that is,
analysis of what OT journal articles cited from other journals (Johnson and
Leising, 1986; Roberts, 1992; Reed, 1999; Potter, 2010). Recently, Nowrouzi-Kia
et al. (2018) evaluated top publications with more than 100 citations in
occupational therapy. This study was the first to uncover the highest annual
citation rates, randomized control trials, literature reviews, and
cross-sectional studies in occupational therapy.
Ziviani and colleagues (1984) analyzed the content and citation of three OT
journals, AJOT, BOTJ, and AOTJ. It was the first bibliometric study examining
both content and authority in the OT field. Recently, bibliometric studies have
become a popular method to know the publication trends, find researchers/authors
on a particular topic, and identify journals where prospective authors select to
publish their manuscripts. This study type helps identify a specific
profession’s publication landscape (MacDermid et al., 2015). These data are also
used as criteria for research promotion, researcher incentivizing, grant
allocations, and policymaking. Further, these data can be used to benchmark
faculty, department, institute, or research organization (T. Brown et al.,
2019).
Several studies were reported on the performance of OT researchers. Those
studies evaluate OT authors’ publication output regarding their content and
citation impact. All analyses were conducted for OT authors from specific
geographical locations such as Canada (MacDermid et al., 2015), Brazil (Folha et
al., 2017), the United Kingdom (T. Brown, Ho et al., 2018), and Australia (T.
Brown, Gutman, and Ho, 2018). Recently one study reported the bibliometric
analysis for authors of western countries and Asian countries. It includes a
total of nine countries among them, the United States (US), Canada, the United
Kingdom (UK), and Australia were included as countries of the west, and Hong
Kong, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea were included as Asian countries
(Man et al., 2019). Among those few publications, it was observed that OT
authors had published many publications in non-OT journals (MacDermid et al.,
2015; T. Brown et al., 2017; T. Brown, Ho, et al., 2018; T. Brown, Gutman, and
Ho, 2018). Many highly cited OT papers are also published in non-OT-specific
journals (Man et al., 2019). Another study on OT publication in non-OT journals
from 2004 to 2015 found that publication in non-OT journals increased by 173%
(Folha et al., 2019). Because there has been an explosion of new online
electronic journals with open-access options for publications, publishing is a
multidisciplinary type of journal that has become a global trend among
prospective authors in any discipline.
Recently all bibliometric studies in the field of OT used Journal Citation
Report (JCR) matrices and Journal Impact Factor (JIF) for their analysis
provided by Web of Science (WOS) (T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018; MacDermid
et al., 2015; Gutman et al., 2017; Folha et al., 2017; T. Brown et al., 2017; T.
Brown et al., 2019; T. Brown, Gutman, and Ho, 2018; Man et al., 2019). A simple
mathematical formula calculates JIF. The total citations will be in the
numerator and the citable item as the denominator for the previous two years.
The denominator creates confusion because the authors cite anything from the
available literature. Journals do not label the publications as citable items in
their author guidance. Neither prevents any item from citing (Fernandez-Llimos,
2018). Similar to JIF, Scopus CiteScore also uses citation analysis for ranking
journals. The Scopus database that provides CiteScore is among the two databases
accepted worldwide. The other is the Web of Science (WOS), which provides JIF
(T. Brown and Gutman, 2019; Fernandez-Llimos 2018; Sau, 2020).
The CiteScore metrics released in 2017 offer access to citing and citation
articles. It computes all published materials as citable articles
(Fernandez-Llimos, 2018). However, there was concern about citable items such as
“notes”, “letter to the editor”, “editorials”, “erratum”, and “retracted”, and
there will be many unidentified items. This error has been fixed in the recently
updated version of CiteScore metrics 2020, where they have fixed for the
“articles”, “reviews”, “conference papers”, “book chapters”, and “data papers”
published. Scopus CiteScore has more excellent comprehensive coverage of
published research data (Fernandez-Llimos, 2018; Sau, 2020). Both JIF and
CiteScore calculations are based on citations received by a journal in a given
period for the published citable item in that duration (Fernandez-Llimos, 2018;
Sau, 2020). Significant and strong correlations were found between JIF and
CiteScore in recent studies comparing 14-OT journals published in English (T.
Brown and Gutman, 2019). Hence, both JIF and CiteScore for measuring journal
quality are used in our current study.
Thus, it indicates a requirement for a comprehensive bibliometric evaluation of
OT literature using accurate and accessible matrices, which can be used to
understand the global prospect of OT literature. These reasons prompted us to
conduct a detailed bibliometric and scientometric analysis of research output in
OT using the Scopus database. Hence, the following research questions were
proposed.
* i) What is the year-wise OT-publications trend in Scopus-indexed journals for
2001-2020?
* ii) What are the OT-specific and non-OT-specific publications trends for
2001-2020?
* iii) Which are the top journals that publish peer-reviewed OT publications
between 2001 and 2020?
* iv) Which are top-performing countries in OT-research publications between
2001 and 2020?
* v) What are the collaboration trends in OT for 2001-2020?
* vi) Which are the top-performing organisations in OT for the period of
2001-2020?
* vii) Which are the top-cited publications in OT for 2001-2020?
* viii) Which are the commonly used keywords in OT journals for 2001-2020?
METHODOLOGY
ETHICAL APPROVAL
This study was conducted based on data retrieved from Scopus between 2001 and
2020. Due to no human subjects’ involvement, ethical approval was not required.
SOURCE OF DATA
Scopus database was used for the study. Scopus is one of the international
scientific committee’s best bibliographic databases (Fernandez-Llimos, 2018;
Sau, 2020). Scopus has covered 70 million items and 1.4 billion cited references
since 1970, making it the most extensive research publication database. Scopus
bibliometric information is expensively used in the scientometric analysis.
Citations vary between databases and it is based on the number of journals
indexed in that database. We selected Scopus for this study because it includes
more OT-specific journals compared to WOS and overall indexed more journals
compared to WOS. The citation count was calculated within the database. Due to
extensive coverage (Fernandez-Llimos, 2018; Sau, 2020), Scopus has a more
citable item and a probability of getting more citations to count.
DATA RETRIEVAL STRATEGIES
The search was conducted in December 2021 and was limited to scientific articles
and reviews on OT published from 2001 to 2020. We used the TITLE-ABS-KEY
function using the advanced search option of the Scopus database. Keywords such
as “Occupational Therapy” and “Occupational Therapist” (T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et
al., 2018; Nowrouzi-Kia et al., 2018; T. Brown et al., 2019; T. Brown et al.,
2017: Gutman et al., 2017) was used along with multiple Boolean operators such
as “AND”, and “OR” to retrieve the maximum number of relevant articles. We
excluded non-peer-reviewed documents such as “short surveys”, “conference
papers”, “editorials”, “notes”, “letters”, “books”, “book chapters”, “erratum”,
and “retracted papers” (T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018; Nowrouzi-Kia et al.,
2018).
SCIENTOMETRIC ANALYSIS
The VOSviewer®, a free software, was used. Microsoft Excel 2016® was used for
all the figures and scientometric calculations.
Scientometric data was retrieved from Scopus using a comma-separated file (CSV)
with complete information. The full details, such as citation, bibliographical,
abstract, keywords, funding, and other information, were downloaded as a CSV
file to analyse the data using VOSviewer.
IDENTIFICATION OF YEAR-WISE PUBLICATION TRENDS
All journal titles were screened to identify the OT-specific journals from the
Scopus database. The journals with titles that contained the “Occupational
therapy” word were categorised as OT-specific journals (Folha et al., 2019).
Additionally, we verified all journals’ title, which contains either of these
three words “Ergotherapia”, “Occupational Therapy”, or “OT” and confirmed the
organisation that published those journals. Further, the occupational therapy
organisation or association publishing journals were included in the OT-specific
journal list. The remaining journals were categorised as non-OT-specific
journals. Then year-wise CSV file was imported into VOSviewer to generate
year-wise publication of OT-specific, non-OT-specific information. We used
VOSviewer software citation per source function for this purpose. VOSviewer uses
“source” instead of “journal” in the software. Citation per publication is used
to generate ten-year journal publication output. Then the information is
imported into an Excel file to compute year-wise OT publications, year-wise
publications in OT-specific journals, and year-wise publications in
non-OT-specific journals. The cumulative publications for all three categories
were calculated separately to identify the growth trend of OT publications.
IDENTIFICATIONS OF TOP JOURNALS, AUTHORS, COUNTRIES, AND ORGANISATIONS
The VOSviewer was used to categorise the top twenty journal sources, countries,
and 20 organisations based on publication numbers. Similarly, we used
twenty-year files to identify the top twenty authors who published at least 25
articles and the top 20 individual articles based on the number of citations. We
referred to analysis using CiteScore 2020 from the Scopus database and Journal
Citation Report 2020 from WoS Master Journal List to tabulate the Scopus
CiteScore and JIF for the top-twenty journals.
COUNTRY COLLABORATION NETWORK AND AUTHORS’ KEYWORD VISUALISATION
A network map on international collaboration about OT publication and author
keywords visualisation was generated using VOSviewer software.
RESULTS
The overall OT publication trends revealed a steady growth of (7.72%) each year.
In OT-specific and non-OT-specific journals publication, growth was 0.29% and
7.44%, respectively (Figure 1). Approximately one-fourth (24.30%) of articles
were published in OT-specific journals in the last twenty years, and
three-fourths (75.69%) were published in non-OT-specific journals. From 2001 to
2020, OT publications increased by 165.14 % (n = 1544). Similarly, the overall
OT publication in OT-specific journals increased by 14.84 % (n=57). In contrast,
non-OT-specific journals overall publication increased by 269.85% (n =1487).
FIGURE 1. YEAR-WISE OT-PUBLICATION TREND.
Download as a PowerPoint slideDownload as a PowerPoint slide
A total of 16 OT-specific journals are listed in the Scopus database. Year-wise
OT-specific journal publications for the period of 2001 to 2020 showed in Figure
2. The top five journals published more than half of OT-specific journal
publications. Those journals were the American Journal of Occupational Therapy
(AJOT) 18.42 %, the British Journal of Occupational Therapy (BJOT) 17.56 %, the
Australian Occupational Therapy Journal (AOTJ) 11.53%, the Canadian Journal of
Occupational Therapy (CJOT) 7.64 % and Scandinavian Journal of Occupational
Therapy (SJOT) 7.64 %, (Table 1). Reaming articles were published in
Occupational Therapy in Health Care (OTHC) 6.87 (n=511), Ergotherapie und
Rehabilitation (ErgoR) 6.15 % (n=458), Occupational Therapy International (OTI)
5.28 %(n=393), OTJR Occupation, Participation and Health (OTJR) 4.27 % (n=318),
Occupational Therapy in Mental Health (OTMH) 3.56% (n=265), Journal of
Occupational Therapy, Schools, and Early Intervention (JOTSEI) 3.10 % (n=231),
Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics (POTP) 2.42% (n=180), Physical
and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics (POTG) 2.24% (n = 167), Brazilian Journal
of Occupational Therapy (BrJOT) 1.71 % (n=127), Hong Kong Journal of
Occupational Therapy (HKJOT)1.32% (n =98), and Irish Journal of Occupational
Therapy (IrJOT) 0.28 % (n=21).
FIGURE 2. YEAR-WISE OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY-SPECIFIC JOURNAL PUBLICATION.
Download as a PowerPoint slideDownload as a PowerPoint slide
Sl …Sou…1Bri…2Ame…3Aus…
TABLE 1. TOP-20 OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY-SPECIFIC JOURNALS.
Sl noSourceISSNJournal Impact Factor (JIF) 2020/Journal Citation Indicator
(JCI)Cite score 2020Documentscitationscpd1British Journal of Occupational
Therapy0308-02261.2431.813071348910.322American Journal of Occupational
Therapy0272-94902.2462.612592777022.063Australian Occupational Therapy
Journal0045-07661.8562.18571220014.244Scandinavian Journal of Occupational
Therapy1103-81282.6112.7568791613.945Canadian Journal of Occupational
Therapy0008-41741.6141.95601051918.786Occupational Therapy in Health
Care0738-05770.531.351136067.067Ergotherapie Und
Rehabilitation0942-8623NA0458930.208Occupational Therapy
International0966-79031.4481.5392566214.449Work1051-98151.5051.834031499.2610Disability
and Rehabilitation0963-82883.0333.9331656619.8411OTJR Occupation, Participation
and Health1539-44921.7682.2304377512.4212Occupational Therapy In Mental
Health0164-212X0.321.526416016.0613Archives of Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation0003-99933.9665.7256953137.2314Journal of Occupational Therapy,
Schools, and Early Intervention1941-12430.220.82318073.4915Journal Of Allied
Health0090-7421NA0.9179201911.2816International Journal of Therapy and
Rehabilitation1741-16450.180.51787824.3917Physical and Occupational Therapy in
Pediatrics0194-26382.362.9178361520.3118Physical and Occupational Therapy In
Geriatrics0270-31810.260.716910176.0219Clinical
Rehabilitation0269-21553.4774.9157567136.1220Brazilian Journal of Occupational
Therapy2526-89100.130.41271681.32
The current analysis found that 14 of the top 20 are OT-specific journals, which
published one-fourth of OT articles from 2001 to 2020 (Table 1). Among those
journals, the AJOT received more citations (n = 27770). However, the Archives of
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (APMR) received the highest citation per
document (37.27). The CiteScore of those 20 journals ranges from a minimum of
zero to a maximum of 5.7. Fifteen of the top 20 journals have journal impact
factors (JIF) or citation indicators (JCI). Six journals were indexed in WOS’s
Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). In contrast, two journals were not
listed in WOS. Impact factors for those 15 journals were rage from 0.03 to
3.966.
Among the top OT publishing countries, the US published the most articles (n=
9517), followed by the UK, Australia, Canada, and Germany (Table 2). The
Netherlands received the highest citation per document (41.84), followed by
Denmark, France, Italy, and Norway. Furthermore, data revealed that the US, UK,
Australia, and Australia have solid international collaboration among the best
20 countries published in the past 20 years (Figure 3).
Slcou…1Uni…2Uni…3Aus…
TABLE 2. TOP 20 COUNTRIES IN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY PUBLICATIONS.
Slcountrydocumentscitationscpd1United States951721681022.782United
Kingdom35008613024.613Australia28876247621.644Canada27767430326.775Germany19262773814.406Sweden12022562021.317Netherlands8463539641.848Italy7922002425.289Japan7401056714.2810France6421750227.2611Brazil640799112.4912Spain6381305620.4613China481638913.2814India461730815.8515Switzerland430904221.0316Denmark4151232629.7017Israel377586915.5718South
Korea369564715.3019South Africa356746620.9720Norway340756922.26
FIGURE 3. OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY PUBLICATION COLLABORATION NETWORK OF TOP-20
PUBLISHING COUNTRIES.
Download as a PowerPoint slideDownload as a PowerPoint slide
The top five organizations publishing OT publications in the last 20 years are
the department of occupational science and occupational therapy, the University
of Toronto, Toronto, Canada, the department of health sciences, Lund University,
Lund, Sweden, the school of rehabilitation science, McMaster University,
Hamilton, Canada, school of health and rehabilitation sciences, the University
of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia and department of occupational therapy,
Colorado state university, Fort Collins, USA (Table 3). Among the top 20
universities of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, received the highest
citations (cpd = 200.50).
Org…Cou…Dep…Can…Dep…Swe…Sch…Can…
TABLE 3. TOP-20 OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY ORGANIZATIONS.
OrganizationCountrydocumentscitationsCPDDepartment of occupational science and
occupational therapy, university of Toronto, TorontoCanada414079.93Department of
health sciences, Lund university, Lund,Sweden3662417.33School of rehabilitation
science, McMaster university, Hamilton, on,Canada3661417.06School of health and
rehabilitation sciences, the university of Queensland,
Brisbane,Australia3546813.37Department of occupational therapy, Colorado state
university, fort Collins, co,United States3063021.00Department of occupational
therapy, university of Illinois at ChicagoUnited States2931810.97Department of
occupational therapy, school of rehabilitation sciences, Iran university of
medical sciences, Tehran,Iran27682.52National research centre for the working
environment, CopenhagenDenmark2663224.31Program in occupational therapy,
Washington university school of medicine, St. Louis, Mo,United
States2635513.65Harvard medical school, Boston, ma,United
States252723108.92Faculty of health sciences, university of Sydney, Sydney,
NSW,Australia24123851.58School of occupational therapy, college of medicine,
national Taiwan university, TaipeiTaiwan2435914.96Division of occupational
therapy, school of health and rehabilitation sciences, university of Queensland,
BrisbaneAustralia2257626.18McMaster university,
HamiltonCanada223172144.18University of British Columbia,
VancouverCanada224411200.50American occupational therapy association, Bethesda,
md,United States2122710.81Department of physical therapy, university of Toronto,
TorontoCanada211848.76School of occupational therapy and social work, Curtin
university, Perth, WAAustralia211426.76School of physical and occupational
therapy, McGill university, Montreal.Canada2128113.38Division of occupational
therapy, school of health and rehabilitation sciences, university of Queensland,
BrisbaneAustralia2039919.95
Among the top researcher, Brown T (n=128) was identified as a leading author
with the maximum number of articles in the field of OT, followed by Eklund M
(n=88), Kottorp A (n= 41), Rodger S (n=88), Ziviani J. (n=76) and Mackenzie I.
(n=67). The top authors’ citations per document and lifetime h Indexed are
provided in Table 4. Further, the top 20 highly cited publications are listed in
Table 5. The article published in 2017 received 2309 citations and was the most
cited article in the Lancet. We observed a negative correlation (-0.14278) when
comparing citations with the total year after publication.
Sl …Aut…1Bro…2Ekl…3Rod…
TABLE 4. TOP AUTHORS IN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY RESEARCH.
Sl noAuthorScopus idAffiliationCountryDoccitationscpdh index1Brown
T.35228602300Monash University, Melbourne.Australia12811378.88272Eklund
M.56216675200Institutionen för Hälsovetenskaper, Lund.Sweden88174219.80373Rodger
S.7005081814The University of Queensland,
Brisbane.Australia88204823.27354Ziviani J.6603664282The University of
Queensland, Brisbane.Australia76208127.38435Mackenzie L.7006703790The University
of Sydney, SydneyAustralia6787113.00216Clemson L.6602125528The University of
Sydney School of Health Sciences, SydneyAustralia63145323.06377Fleming
J.7401457123The University of Queensland, Brisbane.Australia60120720.12358Law
M.7202653007McMaster University, HamiltonCanada58262345.22639Gitlin
L.N.7003860203Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.United
States53304857.515010Gustafsson L.7203014989Griffith University,
BrisbaneAustralia534768.981611Kottorp A.6506079508Malmö Högskola,
MalmoSweden5275114.442612Mckenna K.7102801655The University of Queensland,
BrisbaneAustralia51118223.183213Abo M.7004758531The Jikei University School of
Medicine, TokyoJapan5058411.682714Kielhofner G.7007094254University of Illinois
at Chicago, ChicagoUnited States49116623.803315Gutman S.A.7004894255Columbia
University, New YorkUnited States483827.961516Lannin N.A.6602527646Affiliation
information is based on the most recent publication Monash University,
MelbourneAustralia4875315.693417Mccluskey A.55523738500The University of Sydney
School of Health Sciences, SydneyAustralia48117124.402218Iwarsson
S.26643085000Institutionen för Hälsovetenskaper, Lund.Sweden46159934.764319Tham
K.7004310672Malmö Högskola, MalmoSweden44107824.503220Lloyd C.7202193315Griffith
University, Brisbane,Australia4381819.0224
Sl NoArti…1Livi…2Shep…3Bate…
TABLE 5. TOP-20 HIGHLY CITED OT PUBLICATIONS.
Sl NoArticleCitationsAge of publications1Livingston, G., Sommerlad, A., Orgeta,
V., Costafreda, S. G., Huntley, J., Ames, D., … Mukadam, N. (2017). Dementia
prevention, intervention, and care. The Lancet, 390(10113), 2673-2734.
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31363-6230932Shepard, C. W., Finelli, L., & Alter, M.
J. (2005). Global epidemiology of hepatitis C virus infection. Lancet Infectious
Diseases, 5(9), 558-567. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(05)70216-42199153Bateman, E. D.,
Hurd, S. S., Barnes, P. J., Bousquet, J., Drazen, J. M., FitzGeralde, M., … Zar,
H. J. (2008). Global strategy for asthma management and prevention: GINA
executive summary. European Respiratory Journal, 31(1), 143-178.
doi:10.1183/09031936.001387072195124Ringleb, P. A., Bousser, M. -., Ford, G.,
Bath, P., Brainin, M., Caso, V., … Wardlaw, J. (2008). Guidelines for management
of ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack 2008. Cerebrovascular
Diseases, 25(5), 457-507. doi:10.1159/0001310832076125Schweickert, W. D.,
Pohlman, M. C., Pohlman, A. S., Nigos, C., Pawlik, A. J., Esbrook, C. L., …
Kress, J. P. (2009). Early physical and occupational therapy in mechanically
ventilated, critically ill patients: A randomised controlled trial. The Lancet,
373(9678), 1874-1882. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60658-91856116Langhorne, P.,
Bernhardt, J., & Kwakkel, G. (2011). Stroke rehabilitation. The Lancet,
377(9778), 1693-1702. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60325-5125597Gillespie, L. D.,
Robertson, M. C., Gillespie, W. J., Sherrington, C., Gates, S., Clemson, L. M.,
& Lamb, S. E. (2012). Interventions for preventing falls in older people living
in the community. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2012(9)
doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007146.pub3121688Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D.,
Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better
performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles?
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1-44.
doi:10.1111/1529-1006.014311041179Flora, G., Gupta, D., & Tiwari, A. (2012).
Toxicity of lead: A review with recent updates. Interdisciplinary Toxicology,
5(2), 47-58. doi:10.2478/v10102-012-0009-21024810Amini, D. A., Kannenberg, K.,
Bodison, S., Chang, P. -., Colaianni, D., Goodrich, B., … Lieberman, D. (2014).
Occupational therapy practice framework: Domain & process 3rd edition. American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, S1-S48.
doi:10.5014/ajot.2014.6820061007611Alter, M. J. (2007). Epidemiology of
hepatitis C virus infection. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 13(17),
2436-2441. doi:10.3748/wjg.v13.i17.24369691312Sambrook, P., & Cooper, C. (2006).
Osteoporosis. Lancet, 367(9527), 2010-2018.
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68891-09341413Winstein, C. J., Stein, J., Arena, R.,
Bates, B., Cherney, L. R., Cramer, S. C., … Zorowitz, R. D. (2016). Guidelines
for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery: A guideline for healthcare
professionals from the american heart Association/American stroke association.
Stroke, 47(6), e98-e169. doi:10.1161/STR.0000000000000098918414Ohgaki, H., &
Kleihues, P. (2005). Epidemiology and etiology of gliomas. Acta
Neuropathologica, 109(1), 93-108. doi:10.1007/s00401-005-0991-y9021515Shi, H.,
Magaye, R., Castranova, V., & Zhao, J. (2013). Titanium dioxide nanoparticles: A
review of current toxicological data. Particle and Fibre Toxicology, 10(1)
doi:10.1186/1743-8977-10-15862716Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J.
I. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance,
interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science
in the Public Interest, Supplement, 4(1) doi:10.1111/1529-1006.014318281717Litz,
B. T., Stein, N., Delaney, E., Lebowitz, L., Nash, W. P., Silva, C., & Maguen,
S. (2009). Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans: A preliminary model
and intervention strategy. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(8), 695-706.
doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2009.07.0038181118Van Tulder, M., Becker, A., Bekkering, T.,
Breen, A., Del Real, M. T. G., Hutchinson, A., … Malmivaara, A. (2006). Chapter
3: European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in
primary care. European Spine Journal, 15(SUPPL. 2), S169-S191.
doi:10.1007/s00586-006-1071-28171419Wallace, D. V., Dykewicz, M. S., Bernstein,
D. I., Blessing-Moore, J., Cox, L., Khan, D. A., … Tilles, S. A. (2008). The
diagnosis and management of rhinitis: An updated practice parameter. Journal of
Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 122(2 SUPPL.), S1-S84.
doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2008.06.0038081220Roley, S. S., DeLany, J. V., Barrows, C.
J., Brownrigg, S., Honaker, D., Sava, D. I., … Youngstrom, M. J. (2008).
Occupational therapy practice framework: Domain & process 2nd edition. American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62(6), 625-683. doi:10.5014/ajot.62.6.62579512
Our study enlisted 20 author keywords commonly used in OT literature. Overall,
the best 20 keywords were identified, with at least 50 occurrences in the OT
publications (Figure 4).
FIGURE 4. DENSITY VISUALISATION OF KEYWORDS IN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY
PUBLICATIONS.
Download as a PowerPoint slideDownload as a PowerPoint slide
DISCUSSION
Over the last twenty years, overall OT publication output steadily increased,
indicating the profession’s growth in research, and its dissemination is not
significantly influencing the modern era of digitalization. Publication in
non-OT-specific journals is three times more compared to OT-specific journals. A
similar trend was also observed in recent studies (T. Brown et al., 2019; Gutman
et al., 2017; Folha et al., 2017; T. Brown, Ho et al., 2018; T. Brown, Gutman,
and Ho 2018; Folha et al., 2019). This increase may reflect the growth of
research activities in OT across the globe (Folha et al., 2019). Occupational
therapy works along with medical and other allied health professionals. It
allows occupational therapists to work as a part of a multidisciplinary team.
Similarly, it opens the door to interdisciplinary research opportunities. That
multidisciplinary research is used to publish in either medical-related or
multidisciplinary journals. Those journals have higher JIF than OT journals (T.
Brown et al., 2019; Gutman et al., 2017; Folha et al., 2017; T. Brown, Ho et
al., 2018; T. Brown, Gutman, and Ho 2018; Folha et al., 2019). A recent study
found that non-OT-specific journals have three times more JIF than OT-specific
journals (Folha et al., 2019). These multidisciplinary and medical-oriented
journals have more readers than OT-specific journals, giving more visibility and
increasing the chance of receiving more citations. It may also encourage OT
researchers to publish more in non-OT-specific journals (T. Brown et al., 2019;
Gutman et al., 2017; Folha et al., 2017; T. Brown, Ho et al., 2018; T. Brown,
Gutman, and Ho 2018; Folha et al., 2019).
A total of five journals, such as AJOT, BJOT, AOTJ, SJOT, and CJOT, published
half of the OT-specific journal articles. Previous studies also made similar
observations (T. Brown and Gutman 2019; T. Brown, Gutman, and Ho, 2018). These
journals are well-known in OT and have a long publishing history (T. Brown and
Gutman, 2019). AJOT, BJOT, AOTJ, and CJOT were published by prominent national
organizations of OT and recognised by the global OT community (T. Brown and
Gutman, 2019). These journals’ publication frequencies are more, and they
publish more articles per issue than other journals. Among these 16 OT journals,
two journals, BrJOT and IrJOT, are new in the Scopus database and have data from
the past three years. Hence, those journals will have a lower number of
articles. According to the previous study, Scopus-indexed OT-specific journal
numbers were 14 (T. Brown and Gutman, 2019). Among these two new journals, BrJOT
published many articles in three years and placed among the best 20 journals
that published OT-specific articles. OT-specific journals published one-third of
total OT publications. Several OT-specific journals are published globally and
have an online publication (Cruz et al., 2019) but are not included in the
Scopus database. Including all those OT-specific Journals might change the
citation matrices of occupational therapy journals because occupational therapy
journals tend to get more citations than OT-specific journals.
Out of the 20 top journals that produced the maximum number of articles in
occupational therapy, the first eight are OT-specific journals. There is a
normal phenomenon because these journals published OT-specific articles. ErgoR
received more minor citations among those ten OT-specific journals due to its
publication language. This is the only journal listed in the top twenty
published in Germany. All other periodicals are published in the English
language. AJOT, BJOT, AOTJ, SJOT, and CJOT received more citations in terms of
overall citation. It may be due to their large volume of publications (T. Brown
and Gutman, 2019; T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018). AJOT, BJOT, AOTJ, SJOT,
and CJOT received more than ten citations per document. Archives of Physical
Medicine and Rehabilitation received more citations per document than any other
journal in the top 20. It has the highest CiteScore and JIF. Among the
OT-specific journals, POTP had the highest CiteScore (2.9), and AJOT had the
highest JIF (2.246).
The US, Australia, the UK, Canada, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, and Italy are
the top most country in terms of the number of published articles, and this is
different from that of the previous study (T. Brown and Gutman 2019; T. Brown,
Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018). The US published approximately one-third of total OT
publications (n=9517). Other study findings also revealed that the US is the top
OT article (T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018). The US received many citations
(216810) for the published documents. The US is where OT originated from and has
a good education and research system in OT, which may be the reason for the huge
number of publications. The US is also the host country for many OT-specific and
non-OT-specific journals. This could also be a reason for the huge number of
publications in occupational therapy. However, citation per document is more
minor for US articles than in the Netherlands, Denmark, Italy, France, and
Norway, with very few publications compared to the US. It may be due to the lack
of availability of OT-specific journals in their geographic location, which
triggered them to publish their research in non-OT-specific journals with higher
quality than OT-specific journals. The finding also suggested that high-income
countries (HIC) have produced more publications than low- and middle-income
countries (LMIC). It may be due to the lack of human resources, financial
support, and infrastructure for research and policies in LMIC (Prvu et al.,
2019; Regalado et al., 2023).
We found that the US, Australia, the UK, and Canada are the leading countries in
international collaborations in OT publications. The size of the level and
circle indicate the weightage of collaborative activity. A bigger size
represents more collaborations, and a smaller size means fewer collaborations.
The line between two nodes and their densities represents their link and
strength (Figure 3). Color expressed different cluster levels based on
international collaborations (Van Eck and Waltman, 2019). The finding suggests
that HIC courtiers have more international collaborations with more HIC than
LMIC. It may be the similarity of disease burden among HICs compared to LMIC.
Among the top 20 organizations, 18 are universities or entities of a university.
All the top 20 organizations are from HICs. These universities are mainly placed
in the urban set up with all necessary support, such as research culture among
academicians, well-equipped libraries with academic resources, affiliated
hospitals, client participation, internal funding, and grant office supports (T.
Brown et al., 2019). This is favorable for more research output, which may cause
the university domination’s top twenty organization list. Our study found only
one organization in this top list: research institutes from Denmark and one
occupational therapy association from the USA. Though the US alone produced many
OT articles, only five organizations are listed in the top 20, compared to the
US, Canada (n=6), and Australia (n=5). Despite having a high volume of
publications, less representation of US organizations in the top list was also
observed in previous studies (T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al., 2018; Man et al.,
2019). Other countries that are listed in top organizations are Denmark (n=1),
Iran (n=12), Sweden (n=1), and Taiwan (n=1).
Australia (n=11) has the highest representation in the top author list, followed
by Canada (n=1), Sweden (n=4), the US (n =3), and Japan (n=1). The US authors
are less in the top list instate having high publication volume. UK authors
produce more publications than US authors, but no authors from the UK are listed
in the top 20 author list. Law M. from McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada,
had the highest h indexed (63), and Gitlin L. N from Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, united states received the highest citation per document (57.51)
among top-20 authors. Our study found Brown T as a top author in publication
numbers. The finding of T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et al. (2018) supported our study.
Findings also suggest that no authors are listed in the top twenty list from
LMICs. This shows the dominance of HICs in Occupational therapy research.
Of the top-twenty highly cited articles from 2001 to 2020, four papers were
published in 2008, two in 2005, 2006, 2009, and 2012, and one in 2002, 2003,
2004, 2007, 2013, 2014, 2016, and 2017. Our study does not find any relation
with year after with more citations. Our findings opposed previous studies’
findings, which observe a long citation window helps an article gather total
citations (Gutman et al., 2017; T. Brown et al., 2019; T. Brown, Gutman, Ho, et
al., 2018; T. Brown et al., 2017). Most of the highly cited papers are published
in non-OT-specific journals. Most highly cited studies were published in
non-OT-specific journals like earlier studies. Those non-OT journals are
generally high-quality medical journals (Gutman et al., 2017; T. Brown, Gutman,
Ho, et al., 2018; T. Brown et al., 2019; T. Brown et al., 2017; T. Brown, Ho et
al., 2018). It may happen due to the increased pressure to publish in journals
with good impact factors or CiteScore. The quality of journals provides more
visibility, which helps the author get more readership and citations because it
helps in a grant application and promotion (Gutman et al. 2017; T. Brown et al.,
2019).
VOSviewer density visualisation (Figure 4), by default, uses blue, green, and
yellow to represent the density visualisation (Van Eck and Waltman, 2019). The
yellow indicates the number of items in a point’s neighborhood and the
neighboring items’ higher weights. Out of the total best 20 keywords,
“occupational therapy”, “rehabilitation,” “stroke”, “physical therapy”, and
“activities of daily living” are five common keywords used more frequently in OT
research, which are in yellow (Figure 4). Occupational therapy and
rehabilitation are commonly used as keywords because these two words are
identical terms for the occupational therapy profession. The authors used these
two words to make their research visible in the electronic search. Stoke is
probably the oldest and strongest research field where occupational therapists
work globally. Physical therapy is a common allied health profession
occupational therapists may collaborate and publish together. Activities of
daily living are one of the core practice areas of the occupational therapist.
CONCLUSION
Our study shows the dominance of HICs over LMICs in research production. This
might be due to multiple factors unfavorable for LMICs to conduct research,
which may be due to a lack of resources or knowledge translations published in a
specific language (Prvu et al., 2019; Regalado et al., 2023). This scientometric
research outcome gives a glimpse of OT research worldwide. It suggests further
research in OT to discover why the difference in research output between HICs
and LMICs and the different factors that influence occupational therapy research
in HICs and LMICs because these information might be essential for developing
country-specific research priorities or developing strategies in the field of
occupational therapy. Similarly, other disease-specific scientometric research
must be conducted to determine top researchers and countries’ collaborative
institutions. This study retrieved scientometric information from the Scopus
database and listed 25 journals with their CiteScore and Journal Impact Factor.
It was observed that OT articles were published three times more in
non-OT-specific journals, indicating that OT research significantly overlaps
with other disciplines of medicine. Hence, the investigation should not conclude
a literature search with only OT-specific journals. The SJOT is one of the core
OT journals but is listed under the subject category of “public health,
environmental and occupational health” rather than the category of “occupational
therapy”.
KEY POINTS
* 1) From the Scopus database, twenty Journals were identified, which published
a maximum number of occupational therapy articles.
* 2) Scopus database indexed a total of 16 OT-specific journals. Scopus
database also included two OT practice magazines in their database.
* 3) VOSviewer software is an open-access tool that can be used as a
cost-effective method for any scientometric analysis.
* 4) BJOT, AJOT, AOTJ, SJOT, and CJOT are the leading occupational therapy
journals in the number of published items.
* 5) Compared to LMICs, HICs dominate research in occupational therapy.
DATA AVAILABILITY
UNDERLYING DATA
Mendeley Data: Scopus Based Occupational Therapy Research (2001-2020).
https://doi.org/10.17632/yp7xjg4zs3.2 (Sau and Nayak, 2022)
This project contains the following underlying data:
Data File “20 best source which published maximum number of article” contains
analysis of the data obtained from Scopus for 2001-2020. The analysis includes
20 best sources, 20 best cited documents, 20 best authors, 20 best countries, 20
best organisations, 20 highest used keywords, year-wise publication analysis,
and OT-specific journal details.
Data files “Scopus-935-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-981-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-984-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1029-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1038-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1186-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1365-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1287-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1366-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1400-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1508-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1657-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1784-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1785-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1819-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1776-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-1868-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-1962-Analyze-Source”,
“Scopus-2234-Analyze-Source”, “Scopus-2479-Analyze-Source” respectively contains
the data obtained for the years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008,
2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020
respectively with the keywords for search.
Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International license (CC-BY 4.0).
REFERENCES
* Brown GT, Brown A: Characteristics of the occupational therapy journal of
research: the first twenty years. Occupational therapy in health care. 2005;
19(3): 73–92. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Brown T, Gutman SA: A comparison of bibliometric indicators in occupational
therapy journals published in English. Can. J. Occup. Ther. 2019; 86(2):
125–135. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Brown T, Gutman SA, Ho Y-S: Occupational therapy publications by Australian
authors: A bibliometric analysis. Aust. Occup. Ther. J. 2018; 65(4): 249–258.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Brown T, Gutman SA, Ho Y-S, et al.: Highly Cited Occupational Therapy
Articles in the Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation
Index: A Bibliometric Analysis. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 2017; 71(6):
7106300010p1–7106300010p11. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Brown T, Gutman SA, Ho Y-S, et al.: A bibliometric analysis of occupational
therapy publications. Scand. J. Occup. Ther. 2018; 25(1): 1–14. Publisher
Full Text
* Brown T, Ho Y-S, Gutman SA: A Bibliometric Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Journal
Publications by British Occupational Therapy Authors. The Open Journal of
Occupational Therapy. 2018; 6(1). Publisher Full Text
* Brown T, Ho Y-S, Gutman SA: High Impact and Highly Cited Peer-Reviewed
Journal Article Publications by Canadian Occupational Therapy Authors: A
Bibliometric Analysis. Occupational therapy in health care. 2019; 33(4):
329–354. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* da Cruz DMC , Costa JD, Veiga J, et al.: Current electronic journals on
occupational therapy: A descriptive study. Revista de la Facultad de
Medicina. 2019; 67: 437–442.
* Cusick A: Australian occupational therapy research: A review of publications
1987–91. Aust. Occup. Ther. J. 1995; 42(2): 67–75. Publisher Full Text
* Ernest M: Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy: a reflection of
professional growth. Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue
canadienne d’ergotherapie. 1983; 50(5): 165–169. PubMed Abstract | Publisher
Full Text
* Fernandez-Llimos F: Differences and similarities between Journal Impact
Factor and CiteScore. Pharm. Pract. 2018; 16(2): 1282. PubMed Abstract |
Publisher Full Text
* Folha OAdAC, da Cruz DMC , Emmel, et al.: Identification of articles
published by brazilian occupational therapists in journals indexed in
databases. Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional. 2017; 28(3): 358–367.
Publisher Full Text
* Folha OAdAC, Folha DRdSC, da Cruz DMC , et al.: An overview of occupational
therapy publication in non-specific professional journals in the period of
2004 to 20151. Brazilian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2019; 27(3):
650–662. Publisher Full Text
* Gutman SA, Brown T, Ho Y-S: A Bibliometric Analysis of Highly Cited and High
Impact Occupational Therapy Publications by American Authors. Occupational
therapy in health care. 2017; 31(3): 167–187. PubMed Abstract | Publisher
Full Text
* Johnson KS, Leising DJ: The literature of occupational therapy: a citation
analysis study. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 1986; 40(6): 390–396. Publisher Full Text
* MacDermid JC, Fung EH, Law M: Bibliometric Analyses of Physical and
Occupational Therapy Faculty across Canada Indicate Productivity and Impact
of Rehabilitation Research. Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada.
2015; 67(1): 76–84. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Madill H, Brintnell S, Stewin L: Professional Literature: One View of a
National Perspective. Aust. Occup. Ther. J. 1989; 36(3): 110–119. Publisher
Full Text
* Man DWK, Tsang WSF, Lu EY, et al.: Bibliometric study of research
productivity in occupational therapy and physical therapy/physiotherapy in
four Western countries and five Asian countries/regions. Aust. Occup. Ther.
J. 2019; 66(6): 690–699. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Meho LI, Yang K: A New Era in Citation and Bibliometric Analyses: Web of
Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Cs/0612132. 2006.
* Mountain GA: A Review of the Literature in the British Journal of
Occupational Therapy, 1989–1996. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 1997; 60(10): 430–435.
Publisher Full Text
* Nowrouzi-Kia B, Chidu C, Carter L, et al.: The top cited articles in
occupational therapy: a citation analysis study. Scand. J. Occup. Ther. 2018;
25(1): 15–26. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Ottenbacher K, Petersen P: Quantitative trends in occupational therapy
research: implications for practice and education. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 1985;
39(4): 240–246. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Ottenbacher K, Short MA: Publication Trends in Occupational Therapy. The
Occupational Therapy Journal of Research. 1982; 2(2): 80–88. Publisher Full
Text
* Pearl AW, Brennan AR, Journey TI, et al.: Content analysis of five
occupational therapy journals, 2006-2010: further review of characteristics
of the quantitative literature. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 2014 Jul-Aug; 68(4):
e115–e123. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Potter J: Mapping the literature of occupational therapy: an update. Journal
of the Medical Library Association: JMLA. 2010; 98(3): 235–242. PubMed
Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Prvu BJ, Liu C, Gandhi DBC, et al.: Emerging Areas of Stroke Rehabilitation
Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review. Stroke. 2019
Nov; 50(11): 3307–3313. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Reed KL: Mapping the literature of occupational therapy. Bull. Med. Libr.
Assoc. 1999; 87(3): 298–304. Reference Source
* Regalado ICR, Lindquist AR, Cardoso R, et al.: Knowledge translation in
rehabilitation settings in low, lower-middle and upper-middle-income
countries: a scoping review. Disabil. Rehabil. 2023 Jan; 45(2): 376–390.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
* Roberts D: The Journal Literature of Occupational Therapy: A Comparison of
Coverage by Four Bibliographic Information Services. Br. J. Occup. Ther.
1992; 55(4): 143–147. Publisher Full Text
* Sau K: Punitive provision to tackle predatory journals. Curr. Sci. 2020;
(Vol. 118). Manipal. Reference Source
* Sau K, Nayak Y: Scopus Based Occupational Therapy Research (2001-2020).
Mendeley Data. 2022; V2. Publisher Full Text
* Trevan-Hawke JA: British Journal of Occupational Therapy: Composition and
Authorship Patterns 1975–1984. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 1986; 49(9): 301–304.
Publisher Full Text
* Van Eck NJ, Waltman L: VOSviewer Manual.2019. Reference Source
* Wallin JA: Bibliometric Methods: Pitfalls and Possibilities. Basic Clin.
Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2005; 97(5): 261–275. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full
Text
* Ziviani J, Behan SUE, Rodger S: Occupational Therapy Journals‐The State of
the Art. Aust. Occup. Ther. J. 1984; 31(1): 6–12. Publisher Full Text
COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE COMMENTS (0)
Version 3
VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 08 Feb 2022
ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comment
Author details Author details
1 Department of Occupational Therapy, Manipal College of Health Professions,
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 576104, India
2 Department of Pharmacology, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences,
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 576104, India
Koushik Sau
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation,
Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation
Yogendra Nayak
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation,
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
Competing interests
No competing interests were disclosed.
Grant information
The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.
Article Versions (3)
version 3
Revised
Published: 22 Jun 2023, 11:155
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.3
version 2
Revised
Published: 11 May 2023, 11:155
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.2
version 1
Published: 08 Feb 2022, 11:155
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.1
Copyright
© 2023 Sau K and Nayak Y. This is an open access article distributed under the
terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
Download
Export To
Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente
metrics
Views Downloads F1000Research 2005 199 PubMed Central
info_outline
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
0 0
Citations
open_in_new
0
open_in_new
0
open_in_new
SEE MORE DETAILS
CITE
how to cite this article
Sau K and Nayak Y. Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric analysis of
occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer review: 1
approved] F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108772.3)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the
title is included in all citations of this article.
COPY CITATION DETAILS
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.
TRACK THIS ARTICLE
Share
OPEN PEER REVIEW
Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if
any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant
revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers
academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and
conclusions
Version 2
VERSION 2
PUBLISHED 11 May 2023
Revised
Views
12
Cite
How to cite this report:
Kamalakannan S. Reviewer Report For: Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric
analysis of occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer
review: 1 approved]. F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.146052.r173017)
The direct URL for this report is:
https://f1000research.com/articles/11-155/v2#referee-response-173017
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the
title is included in this citation.
Close Copy Citation Details
Reviewer Report 25 May 2023
Sureshkumar Kamalakannan, Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), South Asia
Centre for Disability Inclusive Development and Research (SACDIR), Indian
Institute of Public Health - Hyderabad (IIPH-H), Hyderabad, Telangana, India;
Department of Social Work, Education and Community Well-being, Northumbria
University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
Approved
VIEWS 0
https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.146052.r173017
It is good to see that the authors have revised the manuscript based on the
reviewer's comments. Please proofread the ... Continue reading
READ ALL
It is good to see that the authors have revised the manuscript based on the
reviewer's comments. Please proofread the manuscript. For example Low and
Middle-Income Country has an acronym LIMC.
I approve this submission.
Best Wishes
Suresh
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific
standard.
Close
READ LESS
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Kamalakannan S. Reviewer Report For: Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric
analysis of occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer
review: 1 approved]. F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.146052.r173017)
The direct URL for this report is:
https://f1000research.com/articles/11-155/v2#referee-response-173017
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the
title is included in all citations of this article.
COPY CITATION DETAILS
Report a concern
* Author Response 16 Nov 2023
Yogendra Nayak, Department of Pharmacology, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical
Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 576104, India
16 Nov 2023
Author Response
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
Competing Interests: I declare that, I donot have any conflict of interest.
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
Competing Interests: I declare that, I donot have any conflict of interest.
Close
Report a concern
* Respond or Comment
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
* Author Response 16 Nov 2023
Yogendra Nayak, Department of Pharmacology, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical
Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 576104, India
16 Nov 2023
Author Response
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
Competing Interests: I declare that, I donot have any conflict of interest.
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
Competing Interests: I declare that, I donot have any conflict of interest.
Close
Report a concern
* COMMENT ON THIS REPORT
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 08 Feb 2022
Views
44
Cite
How to cite this report:
Kamalakannan S. Reviewer Report For: Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric
analysis of occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer
review: 1 approved]. F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.120194.r140811)
The direct URL for this report is:
https://f1000research.com/articles/11-155/v1#referee-response-140811
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the
title is included in this citation.
Close Copy Citation Details
Reviewer Report 20 Jul 2022
Sureshkumar Kamalakannan, Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), South Asia
Centre for Disability Inclusive Development and Research (SACDIR), Indian
Institute of Public Health - Hyderabad (IIPH-H), Hyderabad, Telangana, India;
Department of Social Work, Education and Community Well-being, Northumbria
University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 0
https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.120194.r140811
This is an important work implying the need for OT (occupational therapy)
research development. The primary concern is related to the selection of only
one database for this research study and the rationale/importance of this work
in the current context. ... Continue reading
READ ALL
This is an important work implying the need for OT (occupational therapy)
research development. The primary concern is related to the selection of only
one database for this research study and the rationale/importance of this work
in the current context. This needs to be justified and details related to the
rationale must be added. The other concern is related to the discussion
conclusion sections - where the authors highlight several aspects related to the
results from this research but fail to connect the findings with implications
for OT research, professional development, policies, and practice. Particularly
the implications for LMICs (Low and Middle Income Countries). This study
highlights OT research developing in 5 high-income nations and misses to include
what could be done in the rest of the world to bring OT research to the
standards found in those 5 high-income nations. The conclusions are also not
directly relevant. These issues require revision. Additionally, the language
requires proofreading and revision.
I congratulate the authors for their efforts and suggestions to revise the
manuscript based on my comments.
* Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current
literature?
Yes
* Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
* Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication
by others?
Partly
* If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation
appropriate?
Yes
* Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full
reproducibility?
Yes
* Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
No
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Disability, Public Health and Epidemiology
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific
standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.
Close
READ LESS
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Kamalakannan S. Reviewer Report For: Scopus based bibliometric and scientometric
analysis of occupational therapy publications from 2001 to 2020 [version 3; peer
review: 1 approved]. F1000Research 2023, 11:155
(https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.120194.r140811)
The direct URL for this report is:
https://f1000research.com/articles/11-155/v1#referee-response-140811
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the
title is included in all citations of this article.
COPY CITATION DETAILS
Report a concern
* Author Response 11 May 2023
Yogendra Nayak, Department of Pharmacology, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical
Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 576104, India
11 May 2023
Author Response
Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are writing the following
responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for
... Continue reading Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are
writing the following responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for our study in methodology
sections under the subheadings “source of data”. Citations vary between
databases and it is based on the number of journals indexed in that
database. We selected Scopus for this study because it includes more
OT-specific journals compared to WOS and overall indexed more journals
compared to WOS. The citation count was calculated within the database.
Due to extensive coverage, Scopus has a more citable item and a
probability of getting more citations to count.
2. The suggestions of LIMC is included in the discussion sections of revised
manuscript.
3. Conclusion is modified according to suggestions, incorporation of the
implications for further research in the field of occupational therapy.
4. Language proofing taken care and the necessary changes are made in the
revised manuscript.
Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are writing the following
responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for our study in methodology
sections under the subheadings “source of data”. Citations vary between
databases and it is based on the number of journals indexed in that
database. We selected Scopus for this study because it includes more
OT-specific journals compared to WOS and overall indexed more journals
compared to WOS. The citation count was calculated within the database.
Due to extensive coverage, Scopus has a more citable item and a
probability of getting more citations to count.
2. The suggestions of LIMC is included in the discussion sections of revised
manuscript.
3. Conclusion is modified according to suggestions, incorporation of the
implications for further research in the field of occupational therapy.
4. Language proofing taken care and the necessary changes are made in the
revised manuscript.
Competing Interests: Authors declare that there is no financial or
non-financial conflict of interest Close
Report a concern
* Respond or Comment
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
* Author Response 11 May 2023
Yogendra Nayak, Department of Pharmacology, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical
Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 576104, India
11 May 2023
Author Response
Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are writing the following
responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for
... Continue reading Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are
writing the following responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for our study in methodology
sections under the subheadings “source of data”. Citations vary between
databases and it is based on the number of journals indexed in that
database. We selected Scopus for this study because it includes more
OT-specific journals compared to WOS and overall indexed more journals
compared to WOS. The citation count was calculated within the database.
Due to extensive coverage, Scopus has a more citable item and a
probability of getting more citations to count.
2. The suggestions of LIMC is included in the discussion sections of revised
manuscript.
3. Conclusion is modified according to suggestions, incorporation of the
implications for further research in the field of occupational therapy.
4. Language proofing taken care and the necessary changes are made in the
revised manuscript.
Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are writing the following
responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for our study in methodology
sections under the subheadings “source of data”. Citations vary between
databases and it is based on the number of journals indexed in that
database. We selected Scopus for this study because it includes more
OT-specific journals compared to WOS and overall indexed more journals
compared to WOS. The citation count was calculated within the database.
Due to extensive coverage, Scopus has a more citable item and a
probability of getting more citations to count.
2. The suggestions of LIMC is included in the discussion sections of revised
manuscript.
3. Conclusion is modified according to suggestions, incorporation of the
implications for further research in the field of occupational therapy.
4. Language proofing taken care and the necessary changes are made in the
revised manuscript.
Competing Interests: Authors declare that there is no financial or
non-financial conflict of interest Close
Report a concern
* COMMENT ON THIS REPORT
COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE COMMENTS (0)
Version 3
VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 08 Feb 2022
ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comment
keyboard_arrow_leftkeyboard_arrow_right
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS
info_outline
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor,
if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small
changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific
details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in
the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
REVIEWER REPORTS
Invited Reviewers 1 Version 3
(revision)
22 Jun 23 Version 2
(revision)
11 May 23 read Version 1
08 Feb 22 read
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sureshkumar Kamalakannan, Indian Institute of Public Health - Hyderabad
(IIPH-H), Hyderabad, India; Northumbria University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE
All Comments(0)
Add a comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up for content alerts
Sign Up
You are now signed up to receive this alert
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BROWSE BY RELATED SUBJECTS
* Library science
* Media and communications
* Social sciences
keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports
REVIEWER REPORT
12 Views
copyright
© 2023 Kamalakannan S. This is an open access peer review report distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
25 May 2023 | for Version 2
Sureshkumar Kamalakannan, Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), South Asia
Centre for Disability Inclusive Development and Research (SACDIR), Indian
Institute of Public Health - Hyderabad (IIPH-H), Hyderabad, Telangana, India;
Department of Social Work, Education and Community Well-being, Northumbria
University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 Views
copyright
© 2023 Kamalakannan S. This is an open access peer review report distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approved
info_outline
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor,
if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small
changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific
details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in
the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
It is good to see that the authors have revised the manuscript based on the
reviewer's comments. Please proofread the manuscript. For example Low and
Middle-Income Country has an acronym LIMC.
I approve this submission.
Best Wishes
Suresh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPETING INTERESTS
No competing interests were disclosed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific
standard.
replyRespond to this report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESPONSES (1)
Author Response
16 Nov 2023
YOGENDRA NAYAK, DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACOLOGY, MANIPAL COLLEGE OF PHARMACEUTICAL
SCIENCES, MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION, MANIPAL, 576104, INDIA
Thank you for this. We have corrected the error and revised the manuscript.
View more View less
COMPETING INTERESTS
I declare that, I donot have any conflict of interest.
reply Respond
Report a concern
keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports
REVIEWER REPORT
44 Views
copyright
© 2022 Kamalakannan S. This is an open access peer review report distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
20 Jul 2022 | for Version 1
Sureshkumar Kamalakannan, Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), South Asia
Centre for Disability Inclusive Development and Research (SACDIR), Indian
Institute of Public Health - Hyderabad (IIPH-H), Hyderabad, Telangana, India;
Department of Social Work, Education and Community Well-being, Northumbria
University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
44 Views
copyright
© 2022 Kamalakannan S. This is an open access peer review report distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approved With Reservations
info_outline
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor,
if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small
changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific
details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in
the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
This is an important work implying the need for OT (occupational therapy)
research development. The primary concern is related to the selection of only
one database for this research study and the rationale/importance of this work
in the current context. This needs to be justified and details related to the
rationale must be added. The other concern is related to the discussion
conclusion sections - where the authors highlight several aspects related to the
results from this research but fail to connect the findings with implications
for OT research, professional development, policies, and practice. Particularly
the implications for LMICs (Low and Middle Income Countries). This study
highlights OT research developing in 5 high-income nations and misses to include
what could be done in the rest of the world to bring OT research to the
standards found in those 5 high-income nations. The conclusions are also not
directly relevant. These issues require revision. Additionally, the language
requires proofreading and revision.
I congratulate the authors for their efforts and suggestions to revise the
manuscript based on my comments.
* Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current
literature?
Yes
* Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
* Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication
by others?
Partly
* If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation
appropriate?
Yes
* Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full
reproducibility?
Yes
* Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
No
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPETING INTERESTS
No competing interests were disclosed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REVIEWER EXPERTISE
Disability, Public Health and Epidemiology
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific
standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.
replyRespond to this report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESPONSES (1)
Author Response
11 May 2023
YOGENDRA NAYAK, DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACOLOGY, MANIPAL COLLEGE OF PHARMACEUTICAL
SCIENCES, MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION, MANIPAL, 576104, INDIA
Authors are thankful for the reviewer comment. We are writing the following
responses with the revision of the manuscript.
1. We have justified why we used one databased for our study in methodology
sections under the subheadings “source of data”. Citations vary between
databases and it is based on the number of journals indexed in that
database. We selected Scopus for this study because it includes more
OT-specific journals compared to WOS and overall indexed more journals
compared to WOS. The citation count was calculated within the database. Due
to extensive coverage, Scopus has a more citable item and a probability of
getting more citations to count.
2. The suggestions of LIMC is included in the discussion sections of revised
manuscript.
3. Conclusion is modified according to suggestions, incorporation of the
implications for further research in the field of occupational therapy.
4. Language proofing taken care and the necessary changes are made in the
revised manuscript.
View more View less
COMPETING INTERESTS
Authors declare that there is no financial or non-financial conflict of interest
reply Respond
Report a concern
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor,
if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more
significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the
papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings
and conclusions
Adjust parameters to alter display
View on desktop for interactive features
Includes Interactive Elements
Download as a PowerPoint slideDownload as a PowerPoint slide
View on desktop for interactive features
COMPETING INTERESTS POLICY
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests
to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person
to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that
this is not an exhaustive list:
Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests'
1. Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or
collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper.
2. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or
domestic partner) with any of the authors.
3. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g.
scientific mentor, recent student).
4. You work at the same institute as any of the authors.
5. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your
submission.
6. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published.
Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests'
1. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the
following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from
your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements.
2. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant
support or other funding with any of the authors.
3. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant
stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting
on.
STAY UPDATED
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly
published articles
Register with F1000Research
Already registered? Sign in
Not now, thanks
close
PLEASE NOTE
If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the
account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify
your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”.
If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with
the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit
your report, please do not post your review here.
If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us.
All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies. The
information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment.
User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article
under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider
to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms
and Conditions. Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When
criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made
available.
I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions
Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions.
Affiliation
✕
refresh
Please enter your institution.
Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then
select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in
both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name
does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have
entered.
✕
refresh
Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands
Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and
Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain
Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia
and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory
British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon
Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China
Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands
Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic
of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El
Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe
Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French
Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar
Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau
Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State)
Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel
Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and
Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon
Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi
Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius
Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco
Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal
Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue
Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman
Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru
Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian
Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre
and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and
Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia
Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South
Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and
Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand
The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda
Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan
Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western
Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe
Please select your country/region.
WYSIWYG-Editor, new-comment-report
Editor WerkzeugleistenGrundstile Fett Tastaturkürzel
Strg+B Kursiv Tastaturkürzel Strg+I Unterstrichen Tastaturkürzel
Strg+U Tiefgestellt Hochgestellt Formatierung entfernenAbsatz Nummerierte Liste
einfügen/entfernen ListeLinks Link einfügen/editieren Tastaturkürzel Strg+K Link
entfernenEinfügen Insert Equation Sonderzeichen
einfügenZwischenablage/Rückgängig Rückgängig Tastaturkürzel
Strg+Z Wiederherstellen Tastaturkürzel Strg+YWerkzeuge Maximieren
You must enter a comment.
Competing Interests
Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence
your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance.
COMPETING INTERESTS POLICY
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests
to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person
to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that
this is not an exhaustive list:
Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests'
1. Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or
collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper.
2. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or
domestic partner) with any of the authors.
3. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g.
scientific mentor, recent student).
4. You work at the same institute as any of the authors.
5. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your
submission.
6. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published.
Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests'
1. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the
following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from
your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements.
2. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant
support or other funding with any of the authors.
3. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant
stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting
on.
Please state your competing interests
The comment has been saved.
An error has occurred. Please try again.
Cancel Post
close
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
{{reportCitation}}
Cancel Copy Citation Details
close
Error
Close Add Reset
An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and
open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing.
Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice
Privacy Notice RSS
Submit Your Research
Follow us
© 2012-2024 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of
Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing
Sign In
SIGN IN
By proceeding you agree to F1000’s
General Terms and Conditions
OR
Remember me
Forgotten your password?
Sign In Cancel
Email or password not correct. Please try again
Please wait...
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and
we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
Email address not valid, please try again
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
Code not correct, please try again
Reset password Cancel
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to
reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please
check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Please wait...
Register
Are you sure?YesNo
Help & Information
OK
Cookies Button
ABOUT COOKIES ON THIS SITE
We and our partners use cookies to enhance your website experience, learn how
our site is used, offer personalised features, measure the effectiveness of our
services, and tailor content and ads to your interests while you navigate on the
web or interact with us across devices. You can choose to accept all of these
cookies or only essential cookies. To learn more or manage your preferences,
click “Settings”. For further information about the data we collect from you,
please see our Privacy Policy
Accept All
Settings
COOKIE POLICY
When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your
browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you,
your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you
expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can
give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to
privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the
different category headings to find out more and change our default settings.
However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site
and the services we are able to offer.
More information
Allow All
MANAGE CONSENT PREFERENCES
STRICTLY NECESSARY COOKIES
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched
off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you
which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy
preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to
block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then
work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.
Cookies Details
PERFORMANCE COOKIES
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and
improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the
most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All
information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you
do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and
will not be able to monitor its performance.
Cookies Details
FUNCTIONAL COOKIES
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and
personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose
services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then
some or all of these services may not function properly.
Cookies Details
TARGETING COOKIES
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may
be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you
relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal
information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet
device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted
advertising.
Cookies Details
SOCIAL MEDIA COOKIES
Social Media Cookies
These cookies are set by a range of social media services that we have added to
the site to enable you to share our content with your friends and networks. They
are capable of tracking your browser across other sites and building up a
profile of your interests. This may impact the content and messages you see on
other websites you visit. If you do not allow these cookies you may not be
able to use or see these sharing tools.
Cookies Details
Back Button
COOKIE LIST
Search Icon
Filter Icon
Clear
checkbox label label
Apply Cancel
Consent Leg.Interest
checkbox label label
checkbox label label
checkbox label label
Confirm My Choices