Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

COVID-19 and Scientific Research Interests and Findings in Epidemiology and Social Sciences: A Systematic Review

Version 1 : Received: 18 March 2021 / Approved: 22 March 2021 / Online: 22 March 2021 (10:22:44 CET)

How to cite: Lokonon, B.E.; Gbaguidi Alia, M.; Glèlè Kakaï, R. COVID-19 and Scientific Research Interests and Findings in Epidemiology and Social Sciences: A Systematic Review. Preprints 2021, 2021030509 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202103.0509.v1). Lokonon, B.E.; Gbaguidi Alia, M.; Glèlè Kakaï, R. COVID-19 and Scientific Research Interests and Findings in Epidemiology and Social Sciences: A Systematic Review. Preprints 2021, 2021030509 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202103.0509.v1).

Abstract

The emergence of COVID-19 has prompted an unprecedented scientic publication with the aim of better understanding this new disease. This study assessed the scientic impact and disciplinary priorities of the published papers on the pandemic by comparing epidemiological (EP) and social sciences (SS) research interests. Papers were identified via keywords searching using Google Scholar and Scopus databases. From an initial 1720 papers, we identified 597 relevant articles, of which 347 were for EP researches and 250 for SS studies. We extracted information, such as authors' countries, and research thematic related to EP and SS. The results revealed that most papers were authored by Asian (37.5%), European (30.5%) and American (19.6%) scientists. Only 10.1% and 2.3% of authors were aliated with African and Oceanian institutions, respectively, indicating that the regions most affected by the pandemic mainly contributed to the scientic publications. In total, 26 research themes were recorded from both EP and SS studies. There was a high signicant dierence among themes in both research fields (Chi-square = 1204.3, df = 1, p-value < 0.001). EP papers mostly dealt with clinical trials (54.5%) and diagnosis (53.3%). These papers assessed the incidence and epidemiological characteristics of the disease (incubation period, symptomatic period, recovering or death), testing tests developed, drugs and vaccines used. SS papers were mainly concerned with the sociocultural analyses (78%) and economic impact (55.6%) of the pandemic. They mainly focused on behavioral changes induced by the pandemic and strategies developed to mitigate its impacts. This study highlights the difference between regions and gaps between scientific disciplines concerning the proposed responses to control the pandemic. It is important to promote collaborative and interdisciplinary studies for health emergencies.

Keywords

SARS-Cov-2; geographical regions; research interests and findings; collaborative research

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.