Bibliometric Review of Anatomical Terminology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2023.11259Keywords:
Terminologia anatomica, anatomy, bibliometryAbstract
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
Metrics
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Ahmad Fasichul Iman, Yunia ` Hastami, Selfi Handayani, Siti Munawaroh, Nanang Wiyono (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0)
