Monash bioethics review

Top Research Topics at Monash bioethics review?

The journal facilitates discussions on Law, Bioethics, Public relations, Research ethics and Environmental ethics. Monash bioethics review held discussions to help close the divide between two different fields of study: Public relations and Context (language use). In addition to Research ethics research, the journal aims to explore topics under Corporate governance and Ethical code.

• Law (16.50%)
• Bioethics (16.12%)
• Public relations (10.29%)

What are the most cited papers published in the journal?

• The Warnock Report: A Review. Dame Mary Warnock (Chairman), Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, £6.40 (171 citations)
• Bioconservatism, Bioliberalism, and the Wisdom of Reflecting on Repugnance (39 citations)
• The ethics of expectations: biobanks and the promise of personalised medicine. (36 citations)

Research areas of the most cited articles at Monash bioethics review:

The main points discussed in the journal papers deal with Bioethics, Social psychology, Context (language use), Law and Public relations. While work presented in the journal publications provide substantial information on Bioethics, it also covers topics in Reciprocity (social psychology), Medical ethics, Epistemology, Social science and Professional development. Law study tackled in the journal publications is connected to the field of Media studies.

What topics the last edition of the journal is best known for?

• Law
• Epistemology
• Social science

The previous edition focused in particular on these issues:

Monash bioethics review primarily tackles Public relations, Bioethics, Research ethics, Autonomy and Context (language use). The journal explores issues in Public relations which can be linked to other research areas like Focus group, Qualitative research, Reproductive care, Field (Bourdieu) and Assisted reproductive technology. Monash bioethics review features works in Qualitative research, more specifically Grounded theory, and explores their relation to disciplines like Public good.

While work presented in Monash bioethics review provided substantial information on Bioethics, it also covered topics in Ethical issues, Transparency (behavior), Eugenics and Human enhancement. The research on Research ethics tackled can also make contributions to studies in the areas of Guideline, Biobank and Compliance (psychology). The studies in Autonomy featured incorporate elements of Promotion (rank), Advance care planning, End-of-life care, Diversity (business) and Face (sociological concept).

The most cited articles from the last journal are:

• 50 Years of advance care planning: what do we call success? (1 citations)
• Public perceptions on Controlled Human Infection Model (CHIM) studies—a qualitative pilot study from South India (1 citations)
• Medical interventions for children born with variations in their sex characteristics: what's the rights approach? (0 citations)

Papers citation over time

A key indicator for each journal is its effectiveness in reaching other researchers with the papers published at that venue.

The chart below presents the interquartile range (first quartile 25%, median 50% and third quartile 75%) of the number of citations of articles over time.

Top authors and change over time

The top authors publishing in Monash bioethics review (based on the number of publications) are:

• Nicole Kouros (24 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Lynn Gillam (16 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Justin Oakley (13 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Julian Savulescu (11 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Michael J. Selgelid (9 papers) absent at the last edition.

The overall trend for top authors publishing in this journal is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the journal for top authors.

Top affiliations and change over time

Only papers with recognized affiliations are considered

The top affiliations publishing in Monash bioethics review (based on the number of publications) are:

• Monash University (50 papers) absent at the last edition,
• University of Melbourne (47 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition, 2 more than at the previous edition,
• University of Oxford (19 papers) published 1 paper at the last edition, 1 less than at the previous edition,
• Centre for Human Bioethics (17 papers) absent at the last edition,
• University of Queensland (16 papers) absent at the last edition.

The overall trend for top affiliations publishing in this journal is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the journal for top affiliations.

Publication chance based on affiliation

The publication chance index shows the ratio of articles published by the best research institutions in the journal edition to all articles published within that journal. The best research institutions were selected based on the largest number of articles published during all editions of the journal.

The chart below presents the percentage ratio of articles from top institutions (based on their ranking of total papers).Top affiliations were grouped by their rank into the following tiers: top 1-10, top 11-20, top 21-50, and top 51+. Only articles with a recognized affiliation are considered.

During the most recent 2021 edition, 6.67% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 42.86% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing in the journal. Another 7.14% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 21.43% of all publications and 28.57% were from other institutions.

Returning Authors Index

A very common phenomenon observed among researchers publishing scientific articles is the intentional selection of journals they have already attended in the past. In particular, it is worth analyzing the case when the authors participate in the same journal from year to year.

The Returning Authors Index presented below illustrates the ratio of authors who participated in both a given as well as the previous edition of the journal in relation to all participants in a given year.

Returning Institution Index

The graph below shows the Returning Institution Index, illustrating the ratio of institutions that participated in both a given and the previous edition of the conference in relation to all affiliations present in a given year.

The experience to innovation index

Our experience to innovation index was created to show a cross-section of the experience level of authors publishing in a journal. The index includes the authors publishing at the last edition of a journal, grouped by total number of publications throughout their academic career (P) and the total number of citations of these publications ever received (C).

The group intervals were selected empirically to best show the diversity of the authors' experiences, their labels were selected as a convenience, not as judgment. The authors were divided into the following groups:

• Novice - P < 5 or C < 25 (the number of publications less than 5 or the number of citations less than 25),
• Competent - P < 10 or C < 100 (the number of publications less than 10 or the number of citations less than 100),
• Experienced - P < 25 or C < 625 (the number of publications less than 25 or the number of citations less than 625),
• Master - P < 50 or C < 2500 (the number of publications less than 50 or the number of citations less than 2500),
• Star - P ≥ 50 and C ≥ 2500 (both the number of publications greater than 50 and the number of citations greater than 2500).

The chart below illustrates experience levels of first authors in cases of publications with multiple authors.