Evaluation, Analysis and Visualization of the Co-Authorship Network of Researchers in the Field of Cardiovascular Medicine at Medical Universities in the Scopus Database

Purpose: This study aims to identify, evaluate, and analyze the co-authorship network of researchers in the field of cardiovascular medicine at medical universities in the Scopus database by 2020.
Method: This research is applied in nature and was conducted using a scientometric approach along with social network analysis. The research community comprised all researchers in the field of cardiovascular diseases who had published articles in the Scopus database between 1999 and July 14, 2020, with at least one author affiliated with a medical university. The structure resulting from the
co-authorship analysis was drawn and analyzed using BibExcel and UCINET software.
Findings: The results of the research showed that in terms of the number of articles, Kazem Rahimi from Oxford University with 1143 articles, Maziar Moradi Lakeh from Iran University of Medical Sciences with 1142 articles and Ali Kiadeliri from Philadelphia, USA with 1072 articles ranked first to third respectively. are located and are considered the top researchers in this field in terms of the number of articles (productivity). Also, in terms of the number of citations, Mustafa Ghorbani is in the first place with 100 citations, Hamid Asayesh is in the second place with 99 citations, and Amir Kassaiyan from Tehran University of Medical Sciences is in the third place with a total of 88 citations. Amir Hossein Sahibkar, Reza Malekzadeh, and Nidal Sarafzadegan have the highest centrality of the rank with 105^th, 96^th and 92nd respectively. In terms of closeness centrality, Reza Malekzadeh and Nizal Sarafzadegan have the highest score and Farid Najafi, Amirhossein Sahibkar and Hossein Postachi have the highest score of betweenness centrality.
Conclusion: Researchers who had high degree centrality, betweenness and closeness indicators are in a good situation in terms of efficiency (number of received citations). In this way, the authors of the publications can be informed about the various similarities and differences along with the various indicators of co-authorship of other countries. Also, the reasons for the weakness and strength of researchers in different fields in publishing scientific productions in English language journals and so on will be determined.