Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Characteristics and trends of research on positron emission tomography: a bibliometric analysis, 2002–2012

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

We performed a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications focused on positron emission tomography (PET) over a 10-year period.

Methods

The MEDLINE and ISI Web of Knowledge databases were searched for English language original articles focused on PET in SCI/SCIE-indexed journals in 2002, 2007, and 2012. We selected the documents with titles that included “PET” or “positron emission.” The following information was obtained from each article: journal (year of publication, title, subject category, and impact factor), subspecialty, imaging modality used, tracer, species, sample size, number of authors, affiliation of the first author, declared funding, and country of origin.

Results

The yearly publication on PET increased from 547 (2002) to 986 (2007), and 1838 (2012). A total of 1753 (52.0 %) articles were published in journals in the “Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging” category, 1512 (44.9 %) were in the subspecialty of oncology, 3245 (96.3 %) used PET or PET/CT, 1698 (50.4 %) used 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG) as the radiotracer, 2378 (70.5 %) were human studies, 1294 (38.4 %) had a sample size of <20, 1674 (49.7 %) had >7 authors, 779 (23.1 %) were written by a first author from a department of nuclear medicine, and 1337 (39.7 %) were supported by government funding. The United States published 948 studies (28.1 %) followed by Japan (345, 10.2 %) and Germany (335, 9.9 %). In the time trend analysis oncology subspecialty, PET/MR as the imaging modality, FDG as the tracer, sample size >50, number of authors >7, radiology department affiliation of the first author, and government funding exhibited significantly positive trends.

Conclusions

The number of publication concerning PET has increased rapidly over the last decade. This bibliometric analysis revealed characteristics and trends of current PET research that provides useful information to researchers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480–508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, Kinahan PE, Charron M, Roddy R, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369–79.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Histed SN, Lindenberg ML, Mena E, Turkbey B, Choyke PL, Kurdziel KA. Review of functional/anatomical imaging in oncology. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:349–61.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Luukkonen T. Bibliometrics and evaluation of research performance. Ann Med. 1990;22:145–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Signore A, Annovazzi A. Scientific production and impact of nuclear medicine in Europe: how do we publish? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:882–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rahman M, Sakamoto J, Fukui T. Japan’s contribution to nuclear medical research. Ann Nucl Med. 2002;16:383–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pajares Vinardell M, Freire Macias JM. Twenty-five years of the Spanish journal of Nuclear Medicine. Bibliometric Study. Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2007;26:345–53.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA. 2006;295:90–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hricak H, Choi BI, Scott AM, Sugimura K, Muellner A, von Schulthess GK, et al. Global trends in hybrid imaging. Radiology. 2010;257:498–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Greenbelt M (2011) PET imaging market summary report IMV 2011

  11. Chen RC, Chu D, Chiang CH, Chou CT. Bibliometric analysis of ultrasound research trends over the period of 1991 to 2006. J Clin Ultrasound. 2009;37:319–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Miguel-Dasit A, Marti-Bonmati L, Sanfeliu P. Bibliometric analysis of the Spanish MR radiological production (2001–2007). Eur J Radiol. 2008;67:384–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ingram TG. A cross-sectional analysis of family medicine publications in the indexed medical literature. Fam Med. 1992;24:303–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Garg AX, Iansavichus AV, Kastner M, Walters LA, Wilczynski N, McKibbon KA, et al. Lost in publication: half of all renal practice evidence is published in non-renal journals. Kidney Int. 2006;70:1995–2005.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Donovan AJ, Tompkins RK. Surgical research publication in a selection of research and surgical specialty journals. Surgery. 2010;147:5–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yun EJ, Yoon DY, Kim BY, Kim YJ, Baek S, Lim KJ, et al. Where do radiologists publish their work? A comparative analysis of publications by radiologists in nonradiology journals in 2000 and 2010. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:W560–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ. 1997;314:498–502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Falagas ME, Kouranos VD, Arencibia-Jorge R, Karageorgopoulos DE. Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. FASEB J. 2008;22:2623–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Andersen J, Belmont J, Cho CT. Journal impact factor in the era of expanding literature. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2006;39:436–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Falagas ME, Zouglakis GM, Papastamataki PA. Trends in the impact factor of scientific journals. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:1401–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lim KJ, Yoon DY, Yun EJ, Seo YL, Baek S, Gu DH, et al. Characteristics and trends of radiology research: a survey of original articles published in AJR and Radiology between 2001 and 2010. Radiology. 2012;264:796–802.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Itagaki MW, Pile-Spellman J. Factors associated with academic radiology research productivity. Radiology. 2005;237:774–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rahman M, Fukui T. Biomedical publication–global profile and trend. Public Health. 2003;117:274–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rahman M, Fukui T. A decline in the US share of research articles. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1211–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fang FC, Casadevall A. NIH peer review reform–change we need, or lipstick on a pig? Infect Immun. 2009;77:929–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Friedenberg RM. Academic medicine: boom to bust. Radiology. 2001;220:296–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Riesenberg D, Lundberg GD. The order of authorship: who’s on first? JAMA. 1990;264:1857.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hwang SS, Song HH, Baik JH, Jung SL, Park SH, Choi KH, et al. Researcher contributions and fulfillment of ICMJE authorship criteria: analysis of author contribution lists in research articles with multiple authors published in radiology. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Radiology. 2003;226:16–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Kangdong Seong-Sim Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 445 Gil-dong Kangdong-Gu, Seoul, 134-701, Korea

    Sora Baek

  2. Department of Radiology, Kangdong Seong-Sim Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 445 Gil-dong Kangdong-Gu, Seoul, 134-701, Korea

    Dae Young Yoon, Kyung Joon Min, Kyoung Ja Lim, Young Lan Seo & Eun Joo Yun

Authors
  1. Sora Baek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dae Young Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kyung Joon Min
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kyoung Ja Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Young Lan Seo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eun Joo Yun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dae Young Yoon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baek, S., Yoon, D.Y., Min, K.J. et al. Characteristics and trends of research on positron emission tomography: a bibliometric analysis, 2002–2012. Ann Nucl Med 28, 455–462 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-014-0836-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-014-0836-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation