Rose Hennessy Garza, Jane E Mahoney, Morgan Burns, Andrew Quanbeck
{"title":"Connecting the bibliographic-directed citation networks of translational research and implementation science.","authors":"Rose Hennessy Garza, Jane E Mahoney, Morgan Burns, Andrew Quanbeck","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Translational science and implementation science are two disciplines that integrate scientific findings into practice within healthcare. One method to assess the integration of these fields is to review the academic crossover between the disciplines with respect to shared citations in the peer-reviewed literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This paper used direct citation network analysis to identify potential conceptual gaps and connections between the literature in implementation science and translational science. Bibliographic references were downloaded from Web of Science to create directed citation network maps in VosViewer. Heat maps visualized the top cited literature in each field.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A literature search yielded 6,111 publications in translational science and 7,003 publications in implementation science. When all publications were combined in a directed citation network map, two separate groups of publications emerged, representing the two fields of implementation science and translational science. When the top 50 cited translational science publications were combined with implementation science publications, 14% had a 100%+ increase in citation links, 44% had a mean increase of 2.4%, and 42% shared no links. When the top 50 cited implementation science publications were combined with translational science publications, 2% had a 100%+ increase in citation links, 92% had a 3.3% mean increase, and 6% had no shared links.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results suggest moderate academic overlap in the way published authors cite each other between translational science and implementation science. We hope the implications of this paper may promote continued collaborations between these fields to disseminate lessons learned and bridge research into practice more efficiently.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e64"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975788/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Translational science and implementation science are two disciplines that integrate scientific findings into practice within healthcare. One method to assess the integration of these fields is to review the academic crossover between the disciplines with respect to shared citations in the peer-reviewed literature.
Methods: This paper used direct citation network analysis to identify potential conceptual gaps and connections between the literature in implementation science and translational science. Bibliographic references were downloaded from Web of Science to create directed citation network maps in VosViewer. Heat maps visualized the top cited literature in each field.
Results: A literature search yielded 6,111 publications in translational science and 7,003 publications in implementation science. When all publications were combined in a directed citation network map, two separate groups of publications emerged, representing the two fields of implementation science and translational science. When the top 50 cited translational science publications were combined with implementation science publications, 14% had a 100%+ increase in citation links, 44% had a mean increase of 2.4%, and 42% shared no links. When the top 50 cited implementation science publications were combined with translational science publications, 2% had a 100%+ increase in citation links, 92% had a 3.3% mean increase, and 6% had no shared links.
Conclusions: Results suggest moderate academic overlap in the way published authors cite each other between translational science and implementation science. We hope the implications of this paper may promote continued collaborations between these fields to disseminate lessons learned and bridge research into practice more efficiently.
导读:转化科学和实施科学是将科学发现融入医疗保健实践的两个学科。评估这些领域整合的一种方法是根据同行评议文献的共享引用来回顾学科之间的学术交叉。方法:采用直接引用网络分析方法,找出实施科学和转化科学文献之间潜在的概念差距和联系。从Web of Science下载参考书目,在VosViewer中创建定向引用网络地图。热图显示了每个领域被引用最多的文献。结果:文献检索获得了6111篇转化科学出版物和7003篇实施科学出版物。当所有的出版物被合并到一个定向引用网络图中时,出现了两个独立的出版物组,代表了实施科学和转化科学两个领域。当前50名被引用的转化科学出版物与实施科学出版物合并时,14%的出版物的引用链接增加了100%以上,44%的出版物的引用链接平均增加了2.4%,42%的出版物没有链接。当前50名被引用的实施科学出版物与转化科学出版物合并时,2%的出版物引用链接增加100%以上,92%的出版物引用链接平均增加3.3%,6%的出版物没有共享链接。结论:结果表明,在转化科学和实施科学之间,发表论文的作者相互引用的方式存在适度的学术重叠。我们希望本文的启示可以促进这些领域之间的持续合作,以传播经验教训,并更有效地将研究与实践联系起来。