Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Dec 15;12(1):239.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-023-02410-2.

Preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO): a minimum requirements

Ali Montazeri  1 , Samira Mohammadi  2 , Parisa M Hesari  3 , Marjan Ghaemi  4 , Hedyeh Riazi  5 , Zahra Sheikhi-Mobarakeh  6
Affiliations

Preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO): a minimum requirements

Ali Montazeri et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: A bibliometric review of the biomedical literature could be essential in synthesizing evidence if thoroughly conducted and documented. Although very similar to review papers in nature, it slightly differs in synthesizing the data when it comes to providing a pile of evidence from different studies into a single document. This paper provides a preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO).

Methods: The BIBLIO was developed through two major processes: literature review and the consensus process. The BIBLIO started with a comprehensive review of publications on the conduct and reporting of bibliometric studies. The databases searched included PubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, and Cochrane Library. The process followed the general recommendations of the EQUATOR Network on how to develop a reporting guideline, of which one fundamental part is a consensus process. A panel of experts was invited to identify additional items and was asked to choose preferred options or suggest another item that should be included in the checklist. Finally, the checklist was completed based on the comments and responses of the panel members in four rounds.

Results: The BIBLIO includes 20 items as follows: title (2 items), abstract (1 item), introduction/background (2 items), methods (7 items), results (4 items), discussion (4 items). These should be described as a minimum requirements in reporting a bibliometric review.

Conclusions: The BIBLIO for the first time provides a preliminary guideline of its own kind. It is hoped that it could contribute to the transparent reporting of bibliometric reviews. The quality and utility of BIBILO remain to be investigated further.

Keywords: BIBLIO; Bibliography; Bibliometric reviews; Checklist; Reporting guideline.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Papers with bibliography/bibliographic and bibliometric in the title of publications during 2013–2022 (PubMed)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Trends of using bibliography/bibliographic or bibliometric in the title of publications during 2013–2022 (PubMed)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Equator Network . Reporting guidelines for main study types. 2022.
    1. Groves T. Enhancing the quality and transparency of health research. BMJ. 2008;337(7661):a718. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a718. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet. 1999;354(9193):1896–1900. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–269. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Open Med. 2009;3(3):e123–e130. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources