Аnalysis of studies presented in articles on mitigation of biomedical consequences of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant worldwide (1986–2018)

A lack of accessible information about the demand for domestic articles on the mitigation of consequences of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the early post-accident period necessitates referring to publications presented in international bibliographic databases, which can be a good help in planning research and preparing publications. The intention is an analysis of articles in the field of eliminating the biomedical consequences of the Chernobyl accident in the world and in Russia, indexed in the Scopus database in 1986–2018. A search query gave an array of 3929 articles in Scopus. The largest number of articles was published by authors from the USA (13.2%), Ukraine (12.6%) and Russia (12.2%). A significant number of articles were published by international authors. The average annual number of articles was (119±6) in the whole array and (15±2) in the Russian array. In the whole array, 11.5% of the articles dealt with the biomedical problems of the liquidators of the consequences of the Chernobyl accident; 12.5% – the population living in the radioactively-contaminated territories; 18.7% – neoplasms; 8.6% – medical radiation physics; 21.2% – radioecology; 12.0% – biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology. In the Russian array, these respective percentages were 19.8, 17.3, 18.1, 21.7, 18.8% and 10.2%. On average, there were 10.5 citations per article, 70% of the articles were at least once cited, self-citations made up to 17.6%, and the Hirsch index was 81. A quite high demand for articles in the field of eliminating the biomedical consequences of the Chernobyl accident has been revealed among the world scientific community. Russian scientists should form a habit of quoting articles from their colleagues more often. Some domestic magazines still have a low publishing culture. A lack of transliterated lists of references not only precludes from indexing articles in Scopus, but also interferes with citing research papers from domestic scientists, their affiliated research institutions, and Russia as a whole.

1. Evdokimov VI, Ermolenko TV. Elimination of the consequences of the Chernobyl accident: a bibliographic index of book publications (1987–2010). St. Petersburg; 2011. 158 p. (In Russian).

2. Evdokimov VI, Popov VI, Romanovich IK. Medico-biological aspects of Chernobyl atomic station accident management (following dissertations of 1990–2015). Vestnik Rossiiskoi voenno-meditsinskoi akademii = Bulletin of Russian Military medical Academy. 2016; 3: 158–161. (In Russian).

3. Kasinskaya AI, Pjatrowskaya ZA. Chernobyl [electronic resource]: information and bibliographic resource, 1991–2003. Ed. A.V. Pradzeina. Міnsк; 2006. 1 CD-ROM. (In Belarusian)

4. Makeeva EN, Dromashko SE, Kagan LM, et al. Chernobyl: an interdisciplinary Index of Literature on the Chernobyl Problem. Minsk, 1991. Iss. 1. 190 p.; 1995. Iss. 3. 203 p.; 1996. Iss. 4. 273 p. (In Russian).

5. Chumarina ZM. Neuropsychiatric aspects of the Chernobyl accident: literature index, 1989–1996. Ed. S.A. Igumnov. Minsk; 1996. 73 p. (In Russian).

6. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB J. 2007; 22 (2): 338–342.

7. Meester W. Scopus content coverage & Increase visibility of Russian Research. Preparation of scientific journals for promotion to the international Information space: Scopus recommendations : 2nd International Scientific and Practical Workshop. Moscow, 2018. Available on: https://conf.neicon.ru/ [Accesed: 15/04/2020]

8. Kirillova OV. Publication language and the journal scientometric indicators in global citation databases. Nauchnyi redaktor i izdatel = Science Editor and Publisher. 2019;4(1-2): 21–33. DOI: 10.24069/2542-0267-2019-1-2-21-33. (In Russian).

9. Sterligov AI. Bibliometry for the benefit of Russian science. An open appeal to all those who develop and implement quantitative indicators of publication activity. World-class Scientific publication – 2018: Best practices in preparation and promotion of publicatio: 7th International Scientific and Practical Conference. Moscow, 2018. Available on: https://conf.neicon.ru/ [Accesed: 15/04/2020] (In Russian).

10. Bredikhin SV, Kuznetsov AYu, Sсherbakova NG. Citation analysis in bibliometrics. Novosibirsk: Moscow; 2013. 344 p. (In Russian).

11. Afanasyev VN, Yuzbashev MM. Time Series Analysis and Forecasting. Moscow; 2001. 228 p. (In Russian)