Bibliometric Review of Anatomical Terminology

Ahmad Fasichul Iman; Yunia ` Hastami; Selfi Handayani; Siti  Munawaroh; Nanang Wiyono

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2023.11259

Authors

Ahmad Fasichul Iman Department of Anatomy https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4892-6921
Yunia ` Hastami Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6922-2395
Selfi Handayani Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4227-028X
Siti Munawaroh Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4556-3208
Nanang Wiyono Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0396-4337

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2023.11259

Keywords:

Terminologia anatomica, anatomy, bibliometry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anatomy is an important part of medicine. Anatomical terminology also become the basis for studying anatomy in particular and medicine in general. The need for standardization becomes something important in ensuring effective communication.

AIM: This study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of publications related to anatomical terminology to understand its development.

METHODS: This study uses bibliometric method. The data used in this study were obtained from the Scopus database with publication related to anatomical terminology. The data obtained was then processed using VOSviewer software to create a bibliometric map for later analysis.

RESULTS: There were 1821 publications published from 1914 to 2021 related to anatomical terminology. There was an increase in publications from year to year with the highest number of publications in 2020 with 101 publications. Based on the bibliometric map, the keywords “anatomical terminology” and “latin anatomical terms” were the most widely published in recent years.

CONCLUSION: This study shows that anatomical terminology is still being developed to ensure more effective communication between professionals.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Çan MA, Toraman Ç. The effect of repetition-and scenario-based repetition strategies on anatomy course achievement, classroom engagement and online learning attitude. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22:491. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03564-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03564-8

Stephens S, Moxham BJ. Gross anatomy examination performances in relation to medical students’ knowledge of classical Latin and Greek. Clin Anat. 2018;31(4):501-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.23056 PMid:29396874 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.23056

Moxham B, McHanwell S, Plaisant O, Pais D. A core syllabus for the teaching of neuroanatomy to medical students. Clin Anat.

;28(6):706-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.22577 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.22577

Sangam MR, Praveen K, Vinay G, Bokan RR, Deka R, Kaur A. Efficacy of case-based learning in anatomy. Cureus. 2021;13(12):e20472. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.20472 PMid:35047293 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.20472

Galic BS, Babovic SS, Vukadinovic S, Strkalj G. Clinical relevance of official anatomical terminology: The significance of using synonyms. Int J Morphol. 2018;36(4): 1168-1174. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022018000401168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022018000401168

Ocak M, Aktaş HA, Uzuner MB, Geneci F, Aşkit Ç, Sargon MF. A comparison of the anatomical terminology in the last 25 years. J Anat Soc India. 2017;66:S31-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jasi.2017.09.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasi.2017.09.002

Temirgazina Z, Akosheva M, Shakaman Y, Shaharman A, Kurmanova Z, Kairova M. Metaphors in anatomical terminology. Space Culture India. 2019;7(1):143-53. https://doi.org/10.20896/ saci.v7i1.528 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20896/saci.v7i1.528

Chmielewski PP, Domagala ZA. Terminologia anatomica and its practical usage: Pitfalls and how to avoid them. Folia Morphol (Poland). 2020;79:198-204. https://doi.org/10.5603/ FM.a2019.0086 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2019.0086

Kachlik D, Musil V, Blankova A, Marvanova Z, Miletin J, Trachtova D, et al. A plea for extension of the anatomical nomenclature: Vessels. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 2021;21(2):208-20. https://doi.org/10.17305/bjbms.2020.5256 PMid:33259774 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17305/bjbms.2020.5256

Chmielewski PP, Strzelec B. Should Terminologia Anatomica be revised and extended? A critical literature review. Folia Morphol (Poland). 2020;79(1):1-14. https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2019.0047 PMid:31025702 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2019.0047

Chmielewski PP. New Terminologia Anatomica highlights the importance of clinical anatomy. Folia Morphol (Poland). 2020;79:15-20. https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2019.0048 PMid:31025701 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2019.0048

Bahşi İ, Adanır SS, Kervancıoğlu P, Orhan M, Govsa F.

Bibliometric analysis of Turkey’s research activity in the anatomy and morphology category from the web of science database. Eur J Ther. 2022;27(4):268-80. https://doi.org/10.5152/eurjther.2021.20108 DOI: https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther-27-4-108

El Mohadab M, Bouikhalene B, Safi S. Bibliometric method for mapping the state of the art of scientific production in Covid-19. Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2020;139:110052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110052 PMid:32834606 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110052

Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J Bus Res. 2021;133:285-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070

Adanır SS, Bahşi İ, Kervancıoğlu P, Orhan M, Cihan ÖF.

Bibliometric analysis of articles published in anatomy, the official publication of the Turkish Society of Anatomy and Clinical Anatomy between 2007-2018. Anatomy. 2020;14(1):39-43. https://doi.org/10.2399/ana.20.019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2399/ana.20.019

Klapka O, Slaby A. Visual analysis of search results in scopus database. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). Germany: Springer Verlag; 2018. p. 340-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00066-0-36 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00066-0_36

Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, ShuU BL, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175:10-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70243-0 PMid:8694033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70243-0

Neumann PE. Regular anatomical terms revisited: The simplest is often the right one. In: Clinical Anatomy. Vol. 34. New Jersey, United States: John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 2021. p. 381-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.2366 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.23660