Standing on the shoulders of Giants: a citation analysis of the paediatric congenital heart disease literature

OBJECTIVE

The citation history of a published article reflects its impact on the literature over time. We conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis to identify the most cited papers on CHD in children.

METHODS

One-hundred and ninety journals listed in Journal Citation Reports were accessed via Web of Science. Publications with 250 or more citations were identified from Science Citation Index Expanded (1900-2020), and those relating to structural CHD in children were reviewed. Articles were ranked by citation count and the 100 most cited were analysed.

RESULTS

The number of citations ranged from 2522 to 309 (median 431, IQR 356-518), with 35 published since 2000. All were written in English, most originated from the United States (74%), and were published in cardiovascular journals, with Circulation (28%) the most frequent. There were 86 original research articles, including 50 case series, 14 cohort studies, and 10 clinical trials. The most cited paper was by Hoffman JI and Kaplan S on the incidence of CHD. Thirteen authors had 4 or more publications in the top 100, all of whom had worked in Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, or Dallas, and the most prolific author was Newburger JW (9 articles).

CONCLUSIONS

Citation analysis provides a historical perspective on scientific progress by assessing the impact of individual articles. Our study highlights the dominant position of US-based researchers and journals in this field. Most of the highly cited articles remain case series, with few randomised controlled trials in CHD appearing in recent years.

Are Conference Posters Being Cited?

We present a small case study on citations of conference posters using poster collections from both Figshare and Zenodo. The study takes into account the years 2016-2020 according to the dates of publication on the platforms. Citation data was taken from DataCite, Crossref and Dimensions. Primarily, we want to know to what extent scientific posters are being cited and thereby which impact posters potentially have on the scholarly landscape and especially on academic publications. Our data-driven analysis reveals that posters are rarely cited. Citations could only be found for 1% of the posters in our dataset. A limitation in this study however is that the impact of academic posters was not measured empirical but rather descriptive.

A bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most-cited case reports and case series in Endodontic journals

AIM

To identify the top 100 most-cited case reports and case series published in Endodontic journals and to analyse their bibliometric characteristics.

METHODOLOGY

The Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and PubMed databases were used to identify the top 100 most-cited case reports and case series in Endodontic journals. Complete bibliographic records of the selected case reports and case series were exported in plain text or BibTeX format and imported into the R environment for statistical computing and graphics. The following parameters were then analysed: names and affiliations of the authors, title, year of publication, journal of publication, first author, corresponding author, literature cited within reports, language, citation counts, impact factor of the journal, keywords, Keywords Plus and research topic.

RESULTS

In total, 88 case reports and 12 case series published in English between 1977 and 2016 were identified as the most-cited reports in the field of Endodontics. The terms "case report(s)" or "case series" were not included in the title of 57 articles. The number of authors per report ranged from one to seven, with the average number of co-authors per report being 3.14. The most-cited author was M Trope (University of Pennsylvania, USA). The University of Washington and Private Practice, Cetraro, Italy, were the most productive institutions. The country whose case reports received the largest total number of citations was the United States. The largest number of the most-cited reports appeared in 2002, 2004 and 2007 (n = 7, respectively). According to the WoS database, the total number of citations ranged from 42 to 453, with the average number of citations per report being 79.97. The majority of the top 100 most-cited articles were published in the Journal of Endodontics and the International Endodontic Journal. The most frequently used author keywords were revascularization and mineral trioxide aggregate. The majority of the case reports and case series dealt with topics related to pulp regeneration.

CONCLUSION

This bibliometric study provides a comprehensive overview on the progress, trends and current directions in clinical practice within the field of Endodontics.

Root Canal Disinfection Articles with the Highest Relative Citation Ratios. A Bibliometric Analysis from 1990 to 2019

The relative citation rate (RCR) is a normalized article-level metric useful to assess the impact of research articles. The objective of this bibliometric study is to identify and analyze, in root canal disinfection, the 100 articles having the highest RCRs in the period 1990–2019, then compare them with the top 100 articles most cited. A cross-sectional study was performed, and the search strategy ((Disinfection AND root canal) AND ((“1990/01/01”[Date-Publication]: “2019/12/31”[Date-Publication]))) relied on PubMed (n = 4294 documents), and article data were downloaded from the iCite database. The 100 articles with the highest RCRs and the top 100 cited were selected and evaluated in bibliometric terms. Among the 100 articles with the highest RCRs, there were no differences in the three decades for RCRs values, but there were in citations, being 2000–2009 the most cited. The USA was the predominant country (n = 30), followed by Brazil (n = 14). The most frequent study designs were reviews (n = 27) and in vitro (n = 25) and ex vivo (n = 24) studies. All subfields were well represented, although they varied over time. In 2010–2019, regenerative procedures and irrigation/disinfection techniques were predominant. Considering the RCR’s top 100 articles, 76 were common with the 100 most cited articles. Using the RCR metric allowed us to identify influential articles in root canal disinfection, a research field with topics of significance that fluctuate over time. Compared to citations, RCR reduces the time from publication to detection of its importance for the readership and could be a valid alternative to citation counts.

Olympic Sports Science-Bibliometric Analysis of All Summer and Winter Olympic Sports Research

Introduction: The body of scientific literature on sports and exercise continues to expand. The summer and winter Olympic games will be held over a 7-month period in 2021-2022. Objectives: We took this rare opportunity to quantify and analyze the main bibliometric parameters (i.e., the number of articles and citations) across all Olympic sports to weigh and compare their importance and to assess the structure of the "sport sciences" field. The present review aims to perform a bibliometric analysis of Olympic sports research. We quantified the following topics: (1) the most investigated sports; (2) the main journals in which the studies are published; (3) the main factors explaining sport-specific scientific attractiveness; (4) the influence of being in the Olympic programme, economic weight, and local influences on research output; and (5) which research topic is the most investigated across sports. Methods: We searched 116 sport/exercise journals on PubMed for the 40 summer and 10 winter Olympic sports. A total of 34,038 articles were filtered for a final selection of 25,003 articles (23,334 articles on summer sports and 1,669 on winter sports) and a total of 599,820 citations. Results and Discussion: Nine sports [football (soccer), cycling, athletics, swimming, distance & marathon running, basketball, baseball, tennis, and rowing] were involved in 69% of the articles and 75% of the citations. Football was the most cited sport, with 19.7 and 26.3% of the total number of articles and citations, respectively. All sports yielded some scientific output, but 11 sports (biathlon, mountain biking, archery, diving, trampoline, skateboarding, skeleton, modern pentathlon, luge, bobsleigh, and curling) accumulated a total of fewer than 50 publications. While ice hockey is the most prominently represented winter sport in the scientific literature, winter sports overall have produced minor scientific output. Further analyses show a large scientific literature on team sports, particularly American professional sports (i.e., baseball, basketball, and ice hockey) and the importance of inclusion in the Olympic programme to increasing scientific interest in "recent" sports (i.e., triathlon and rugby sevens). We also found local/cultural influence on the occurrence of a sport in a particular "sport sciences" journal. Finally, the relative distribution of six main research topics (i.e., physiology, performance, training and testing, injuries and medicine, biomechanics, and psychology) was large across sports and reflected the specific performance factors of each sport.

An evidence mapping and scientometric analysis of the top-100 most cited clinical trials of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 drugs to treat cancers

OBJECTIVE

To gain a deeper understanding of the hot topics and future prospects of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors treatment of cancer through scientometric analysis of the top-100 most cited clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the Web of Science Core Collection database from 1980 to June 2019. Two reviewers independently screened the top-100 most cited clinical trials that defined by the National Institutes of Health starting from the most cited article. Title, year of publication, citations, type of cancer, and focused aspects of outcomes were extracted from included clinical trials. VOSviewer software (version 1.6.9) and Excel 2016 were used to do statistical analysis. The evidence mapping was used to present the relationship between cancers, drugs, citations, and outcomes, etc. RESULTS: The top-100 most cited clinical trials published from 2010 to 2018 in nine journals with high impact factor (IF) (IF₂₀₁₈:6.68-70.67), and Lancet Oncology (USA) published the most clinical trials (n = 29, IF₂₀₁₈ = 35.3856). The total number of citations of the top-100 most cited clinical trials was from 59 to 5606. 920 authors from 34 countries and 458 organizations participated in publishing the top-100 most cited clinical trials. The USA (n = 95) and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (n = 31) contributed the most publications. Based on the evidence mapping, there are 25 different types of cancers (e.g. lung cancer, melanoma, and renal cell cancer) and five focused aspects of outcomes (e.g. safety and efficacy).

CONCLUSION

The USA was the dominant country. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 drugs were widely used to treat lung cancer, melanoma, renal cell cancer, and Hodgkin lymphoma. More exploration should be done to explore the use of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 drugs to treat more type of cancers in future research.

Bibliometric analysis of the keratoconus literature

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinicians, researchers funding agencies and indeed the general public can benefit from knowledge of the most highly cited papers and most impactful authors, institutions, countries and journals in the field of keratoconus.

BACKGROUND

Bibliometrics relating to the keratoconus literature were derived to enable identification of the most impactful papers published, as well as the leading authors, institutions, countries and journals.

METHODS

A search was undertaken of the titles of papers on the Scopus database to identify keratoconus-related articles. The 20 most highly cited papers were determined from the total list of 4,419 papers found. Rank-order lists by count were assembled for the 'top 20' in each of four categories: authors, institutions, countries and journals. A subject-specific keratoconus-related h-index (h_KC-index) was derived for each constituent of each category to serve as a measure of impact in the field. The top 10 constituents of each category were ranked by h_KC-index and tabulated for consideration.

RESULTS

The h_KC-index of the keratoconus field is 125. The 4,419 papers have been cited a total of 98,010 times, and 18.5% of these papers have never been cited. The most highly cited paper is a general review of keratoconus by Yaron Rabinowitz, who is also the most impactful author in the field (h_KC = 31). The Cedars Sinai Medical Center in the United States produces the most impactful keratoconus-related papers (h_KC = 36), and the United States is the most impactful country (h_KC = 91). The Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery is the most impactful journal (h_KC = 55).

CONCLUSION

Keratoconus is a topic of high interest in the clinical and scientific literature. Highly cited papers and impactful authors, institutions, countries and journals are identified.

The Correlation between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in Orthopaedic Literature

BACKGROUND

Clinicians and medical researchers increasingly turn to nonformal online platforms to promote research. Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is a quantitative measurement of online influence of research in real time. The objective of this study is to determine if AAS correlates with traditional bibliometrics in the orthopaedic literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From the 15 orthopaedic journals with the highest impact factor, the 10 most cited articles from each journal were reviewed for 2014 -2017. For each article, AAS was collected using the Altmetric Bookmarklet application and citation count from SCOPUS. Journal impact factor was recorded using Journal Citation Reports. Statistical analysis included Pearson's and Spearman's correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

A total of 600 articles were analyzed. A significant positive correlation was found between citation count and AAS for 2014 (r = 0.3188, p < 0.0001), and no correlation for 2015 (r = 0.1504, P = 0.0653), 2016 (r = 0.0087, P = 0.9157), and 2017 (r = 0.0061, P = 0.9408). There was no significant correlation between impact factor and AAS in 2014 (r = 0.4312, P = 0.1085), 2015 (r = 0.3850, P = 0.1565), 2016 (r = 0.1460, P = 0.6035) and 2017 (r = 0.0451 P = 0.8732).

CONCLUSIONS

AAS and traditional bibliometrics are currently not strongly correlated in orthopaedic literature. Citations take years to accumulate and AAS represents immediate influence of an article. An amalgamation of traditional bibliometrics and AAS may prove useful in determining the short- and long-term impact and influence of publications in orthopaedics.

Disseminating Hand Surgery Research Using Social Media: The Relationship Between Altmetrics and Citations

PURPOSE

Social media adds to the traditional methods of research dissemination. It allows researchers and publishers to immediately share content directly with interested end users on a global scale. Alternative metrics (altmetrics) are new bibliometrics that describe article-level activity on platforms such as Twitter, Wikipedia, and online news media. Altmetrics are strongly associated with citation counts in numerous medical disciplines. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship of altmetrics to citation counts in the field of hand surgery.

METHODS

Altmetric Explorer was used to extract data on altmetrics and citation rates for articles published in 2017 in 6 prominent hand surgery journals. Multivariable negative binomial regression was used to estimate the relationship between citation counts and predictors (presented as the incidence rate ratio with a 95% confidence interval [CI]).

RESULTS

Overall, 624 articles were included. Mentions on social media platforms were independently associated with more citations (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.04 [95% CI 1.02-1.05]). The factor that most influenced the rate of citations was the journal in which the article was published; articles in the Journal of Hand Surgery had at least 1 more citation than articles published elsewhere (median difference 3 [interquartile range {IQR} 2-3]) and had a median Altmetric Attention Score which was 3 points higher (IQR 2-3) than articles published elsewhere.

CONCLUSIONS

The dissemination of hand surgery research through social media channels is associated with substantial and measurable improvements in short-term citation rates CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Social media appears to be a valuable tool for communicating important research directly to hand surgeons in a timely and succinct manner.

The rapid, massive growth of COVID-19 authors in the scientific literature

We examined the extent to which the scientific workforce in different fields was engaged in publishing COVID-19-related papers. According to Scopus (data cut, 1 August 2021), 210 183 COVID-19-related publications included 720 801 unique authors, of which 360 005 authors had published at least five full papers in their career and 23 520 authors were at the top 2% of their scientific subfield based on a career-long composite citation indicator. The growth of COVID-19 authors was far more rapid and massive compared with cohorts of authors historically publishing on H1N1, Zika, Ebola, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. All 174 scientific subfields had some specialists who had published on COVID-19. In 109 of the 174 subfields of science, at least one in 10 active, influential (top 2% composite citation indicator) authors in the subfield had authored something on COVID-19. Fifty-three hyper-prolific authors had already at least 60 (and up to 227) COVID-19 publications each. Among the 300 authors with the highest composite citation indicator for their COVID-19 publications, most common countries were USA (n = 67), China (n = 52), UK (n = 32) and Italy (n = 18). The rapid and massive involvement of the scientific workforce in COVID-19-related work is unprecedented and creates opportunities and challenges. There is evidence for hyper-prolific productivity.

The Relationship Between Open Access Article Publishing and Short-Term Citations in Otolaryngology

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to compare the number of citations received by open access articles versus subscription access articles in subscription journals in the Otolaryngology literature.

METHODS

Using the Dimensions research database, we examined articles indexed to PubMed with at least 5 citations published in 2018. Articles were included from Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Laryngoscope, JAMA Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, and American Journal of Otolaryngology. Multivariate Poisson regression modeling was used to adjust for journal, article type, and topic. Practice guidelines, position statements, or retractions were excluded as potential outliers.

RESULTS

137 open access articles and 337 subscription access articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified, with a median citation number of 8 (IQR 6-11). The most common article type was original investigation (82.5%), and the most common study topic was head and neck (28.9%). Open access articles had a higher median number of citations at 9 (IQR 6-13) when compared to subscription access articles at 7 (IQR 6-10) (P = .032). Open access status was significantly associated with a higher number of citations than subscription access articles when adjusting for journal, article type, and topic (β = .272, CI 0.194-0.500, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although comprising a minority of articles examined in this study of subscription journals, open access articles were associated with a higher number of citations than subscription access articles. Open access publishing may facilitate the spread of novel findings in Otolaryngology.

Gendered Citation Practices in the Field of Communication

In disciplines outside of communication, papers with women as first and last (i.e., senior) authors attract fewer citations than papers with men in those positions. Using data from 14 communication journals from 1995 to 2018, we find that reference lists include more papers with men as first and last author, and fewer papers with women as first and last author, than would be expected if gender were unrelated to referencing. This imbalance is driven largely by the citation practices of men and is slowly decreasing over time. The structure of men's co-authorship networks partly accounts for the observed over-citation of men by other men. We discuss ways researchers might approach gendered citations in their work.

Global citation inequality is on the rise

Citations are important building blocks for status and success in science. We used a linked dataset of more than 4 million authors and 26 million scientific papers to quantify trends in cumulative citation inequality and concentration at the author level. Our analysis, which spans 15 y and 118 scientific disciplines, suggests that a small stratum of elite scientists accrues increasing citation shares and that citation inequality is on the rise across the natural sciences, medical sciences, and agricultural sciences. The rise in citation concentration has coincided with a general inclination toward more collaboration. While increasing collaboration and full-count publication rates go hand in hand for the top 1% most cited, ordinary scientists are engaging in more and larger collaborations over time, but publishing slightly less. Moreover, fractionalized publication rates are generally on the decline, but the top 1% most cited have seen larger increases in coauthored papers and smaller relative decreases in fractional-count publication rates than scientists in the lower percentiles of the citation distribution. Taken together, these trends have enabled the top 1% to extend its share of fractional- and full-count publications and citations. Further analysis shows that top-cited scientists increasingly reside in high-ranking universities in western Europe and Australasia, while the United States has seen a slight decline in elite concentration. Our findings align with recent evidence suggesting intensified international competition and widening author-level disparities in science.

A Bibliometric Analysis of 4 Major Foot and Ankle Surgery Journals

Research publication is a central to the scientific process and comprehensive bibliometric analysis is a leading way to better understand trends within research. Currently, there are limited bibliometric analyses of literature pertaining to foot and ankle surgery. This study aims to quantify the volume of research and investigate what may affect publication and citation. Journals associated with the 3 major orthopedic foot and ankle societies (Foot & Ankle International[FAI], Foot and Ankle Surgery, and The Foot) and one podiatric college (Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery®) were evaluated from January 2009 to December 2018 using Scopus (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize article characteristics and regression modeling was used to determine factors associated with a country's current and future productivity and an article's citation rate. A total of 4994 articles were published over the 10-year period, with the largest contributor of publications being the United States of America (USA), who produced 2096 (41.8%) publications. Regression analysis found no association between a country's productivity and gross domestic product or population. There was no significant relationship between a country's baseline publication rate and future publication rate. The variables significantly associated with an increased citation count were; the number of years since publication, the number of authors, publication in FAI and if the article was a review. To our knowledge this is the largest bibliometric analysis of foot and ankle publications. The majority of research is being produced by the USA, but there are numerous complex factors associated with citation and publication rates. Further research is required to fully assess these factors and characterize the state of foot and ankle surgery research.

Five decades of the International Endodontic Journal: Bibliometric overview 1967-2020

AIM

The International Endodontic Journal (IEJ) has served as a platform for research and clinical practice in Endodontics since 1967. This study provides a bibliographic analysis and overview of the publications that have appeared in the IEJ from 1967 to 2020.

METHODOLOGY

A literature search was performed in Elsevier's Scopus database to locate all the publications of the International Endodontic Journal. Various bibliometric software packages including the open-source visualization software Gephi and Biblioshiny (version 2.0) were employed for data visualization and analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 3739 records with citation and bibliographic details were selected and retrieved to allow a bibliometric analysis to be performed. The bibliometric analysis indicates that the IEJ has grown both in terms of productivity and influence. Over time, the journal has been associated with an increase in the number of manuscripts published and the citations they have attracted, but with minor downward fluctuations in citations in the last few years. Bibliographic coupling of the IEJ articles revealed that the major research themes published in the journal include 'endodontics', 'root canal treatment', 'calcium hydroxide', 'apical periodontitis', 'mineral trioxide aggregate', 'microbiology', 'cyclic fatigue', 'cone-beam computed tomography' and 'micro-computed tomography'. Authors affiliated to institutions in the UK were the major contributors to the journal and were linked with other countries such as Brazil, USA and Malaysia. The largest number of publications were from the University of São Paulo, Brazil.

CONCLUSION

The IEJ is one of the leading journals in Endodontology and has been providing a platform for innovative research and clinical reports for more than 50 years. Publications have been associated with a wide range of authors, institutions and countries around the world.

Scientific publications in internal medicine and family medicine: a comparative cross-sectional study in Swiss university hospitals

BACKGROUND

Family medicine is a relatively new academic medical discipline. We aimed to compare the main bibliometric indices of hospital-based senior physicians practicing internal medicine versus family medicine in Switzerland.

METHODS

We conducted this cross-sectional study in March 2020. We selected all hospital-based senior physicians practicing internal medicine or family medicine in the six Swiss university hospitals. Using Web of Science, after removing from both groups of physicians the 5% with the highest number of publications, we extracted the number of publications, the number of publications per year, the number of citations, the number of citations per year, the number of citations per publication and the h-index. We compared the data between the two groups using negative binomial regressions and the proportion of physicians having at least one publication using chi-square tests.

RESULTS

We included 349 physicians in the study (internal medicine: 51%, men: 51%). The median number of publications was three [interquartile range (IQR) = 18], the median number of citations was nine (IQR = 158) and the median h-index was one (IQR = 5). All bibliometric indices were similar in both groups, as was the proportion of physicians having at least one publication (family medicine: 87% versus 82%, P = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no association between the bibliometric indices and the medical specialty. Further studies are needed to explore other important indicators of academic output, such as those more specifically assessing its quality and scientific importance.

Tracking trends of transgender health research online: are researchers and the public on the same page?

Altmetric Explorer was searched for the most popular online articles published in Pubmed-indexed journals. The 75 articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) were screened for article information (date, journal, access), authorship (number of authors, affiliation and origin of the corresponding author), and research (type, subject, funding). The reviewed articles displayed a mean AAS of 241.52, were broadcast 17.03 times by news agencies, posted on Twitter 101.47 times, downloaded by 67.21 Mendeley readers, and received 62.67 citations. There was intense online interest in the transgender health literature, mainly related to mental health and social well-being. Online visibility of transgender health articles was not significantly correlated with citation counts, implying that the public, likely including transgender persons and allies, may place emphasis on different health issues than scholars. Monitoring altmetrics and interactions on electronic media may help researchers conduct research that is more meaningful to transgender individuals, and to society in general.

Publication Trends of Research on Retinoblastoma During 2001-2021: A 20-Year Bibliometric Analysis

Background: Retinoblastoma is the most common primary intraocular malignancy of childhood. Despite high survival and eye salvage as the result of various types of therapies, retinoblastoma remains a disease that places a considerable burden on developing countries. Our study attempted to analyse the research trends in retinoblastoma research and compare contributions from different countries, institutions, journals, and authors.

Methods: We extracted all publications concerning retinoblastoma from 2001 to 2021 from the Web of Science database. Microsoft Excel and VOSviewer were employed to collect publication data, analyse publication trends, and visualize relevant results.

Results: A total of 1,675 publications with 30,148 citations were identified. The United States contributed the most publications (643) and citations (16,931 times) with the highest H-index value (67) as of February 4, 2021. China ranked second in the number of publications (259), while ranking fourth in both citations (2,632 times) and the H-index (26) ranked fourth. The British Journal of Ophthalmology was the most productive journal concerning retinoblastoma, and Abramson DH had published the most papers in the field. Keywords were categorized into three clusters; tumor-related research, clinical research, and management-related research. The keywords “intravitreal,” “intraarterial,” and “intravenous” appeared the most frequently, with the average appearing year being 2018.1, 2017.7, and 2017.1, respectively. Management-related research has been recognized as a heavily researched topic in the field.

Conclusion: We conclude that the United States, China, and India made the most exceptional contributions in the field of retinoblastoma research, while China still has a disparity between the quantity and quality of publications. Management-related research, including intravitreal, intraarterial, and intravenous chemotherapy was considered as a potential focus for future research.

Journal Metrics in Psychiatry: What do the rankings tell us?

BACKGROUND

Metrics of journal's impact factor may suggest the journal's influence in a particular field, but they have been used inadvertently as a measure of the journal and individual publications' scientific quality.

METHODS

We assessed how scientific journals in the field of psychiatry and mental health are ranked (top 20) according to the scores of distinct metrics (Eigenfactor score, Google Scholar Metrics, Journal Citation Reports, Scimago Journal & Country Rank, and Source Normalized Impact per Paper), described their main characteristics and perfomed a spearman's correlation analyses to investigate to which extent these metrics are associated. We also discussed the limitations of dealing with these metrics and the rankings they provide as a proxy of the journal's quality.

RESULTS

Only 5 (12.5%) journals appear in all metrics (JAMA Psychiatry, American Journal of Psychiatry, Molecular Psychiatry, Schizophrenia Bulletin, and the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry), more than one-third of the journals show up in only one and less than half (42.5%) appear in three or more. Only JAMA Psychiatry is in one of the first five positions of all metrics. No journal ranked in the same position across the metrics. On the other hand, we found the correlations between all the metrics were statistically significant.

LIMITATIONS

The metrics included are not exhaustive.

CONCLUSIONS

Although each metric provides a particular ranking, they are highly correlated. Rankings also change according to distinct subject categories in which they are assessed. We suggest less emphasis should be given to Journal Metrics to infer journal's quality.

The 100 most cited articles on lung cancer screening: a bibliometric analysis

Background

The number of citations of an article reflects its impact on the scientific community. The aim of this study was to identify and characterize the 100 most cited articles on lung cancer screening.

Methods

The 100 most cited articles on lung cancer screening published in all scientific journals were identified using the Web of Science database. Relevant data, including the number of citations, publication year, publishing journal and impact factor (IF), authorship and country of origin, article type and study design, screening modality, and main topic, were collected and analyzed.

Results

The 100 most cited articles were all English and published between 1973 and 2017, with 81 published after 2000. The mean number of citations was 292.90 (range 100–3,910). Sixty articles originated from the United States. These articles were published in 32 journals; there was a statistically significant positive correlation between journal IF and the number of citations (r=0.238, P=0.018). Seventy-nine articles were original research of which 37.9% were about results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The most common screening modalities in these articles were low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) (n=78), followed by chest X-ray radiography (CXR) and sputum cytology (n=11). The most common topic in these articles was screening test effectiveness.

Conclusions

Our study presents a detailed list and analysis of the 100 most cited articles published about lung cancer screening which provides insight into the historical developments and key contributions in this field.

Top 100 most-cited oral health-related quality of life papers: Bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the features of the 100 most-cited papers on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).

METHODS

The 100 most-cited OHRQoL papers were collected from Web of Science, adopting a combined keyword search strategy. Google Scholar and Scopus databases were searched to compare citations. The following data were extracted from papers: title of the paper, number of citations, authorship, country, year of publication, title of the journal, study design, sample size, topic and OHRQoL instruments used. Graphical bibliometric networks were created using VOSviewer software.

RESULTS

The number of citations of the top 100 most-cited OHRQoL papers ranged from 73 to 949. Fifty-six papers received at least 100 citations and two received more than 400 citations. Most papers were from Canada (23%) and had been published in Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (37%). David Locker was the most-cited author (25 papers; 3,521 citations). The cross-sectional study design was the most common (68%). The impact of oral health conditions on OHRQoL (43%) was the most frequent topic, and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) was the most commonly used OHRQoL instrument (48%).

CONCLUSIONS

This bibliometric analysis highlighted the characteristics of the 100 most-cited OHRQoL papers, demonstrating that this field is far from saturated. This list of the most-cited articles can provide a reference point to guide oral health research, education and services.

Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Pathology Literature

Background:

Recently, research data are increasingly shared through social media and other digital platforms. Traditionally, the influence of a scientific article has been assessed by the publishing journal's impact factor (IF) and its citation count. The Altmetric scoring system, a new bibliometric that integrates research “mentions” over digital media platforms, has emerged as a metric of online research distribution. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship of the Altmetric Score with IF and citation number within the pathology literature.

Methods:

Citation count and Altmetric scores were obtained from the top 10 most-cited articles from the 15 pathology journals with the highest IF for 2013 and 2016. These variables were analyzed and correlated with each other, as well as the age of the publishing journal's Twitter account.

Results:

Three hundred articles were examined from the two cohorts. The total citation count of the articles decreased from 21,043 (2013) to 14,679 (2016), while the total Altmetric score increased from 830 (2013) to 4066 (2016). In 2013, Altmetric score weakly correlated with citation number (r = 0.284, P < 0.001) but not with journal IF (r = 0.024, P = 0.771). In 2016, there was strong correlation between citation count and Altmetric Score (r = 0.714, P < 0.0001) but not the IF (r = 0.0442, P = 0.591). Twitter was the single most important contributor to the Altmetric score; however, the age of the Twitter account was not associated with citation number nor Altmetric score.

Conclusions:

In the pathology literature studied, the Altmetric score correlates with article citation count, suggesting that the Altmetric score and conventional bibliometrics can be treated as complementary metrics. Given the trend towards increasing use of social media, additional investigation is warranted to evaluate the evolving role of social media metrics to assess the dissemination and impact of scientific findings in the field of pathology.

The Top 100 Most Cited Articles on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background

The concept of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) has become widely accepted, gaining increased attention in recent years and resulting in many research achievements in this field.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine which original articles on ACLR have been most influential in this field by identifying and analyzing the characteristics of the 100 most cited articles.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

Articles on ACLR were identified via the Thomson ISI Web of Science database on November 30, 2019. The 100 most cited articles were identified based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data extracted from each article for the subsequent analysis included title, date of publication, total citations, average citations per year (ACY), journal name, first author, institutions, themes, level of evidence, and keywords.

Results

The total number of citations was 29,629. The date of publication ranged from 1975 to 2015. A majority of the articles originated from the United States (58%) and were published in the 1990s (32%) and 2000s (48%). The mean ACY was 18.43 ± 9.51. Of the selected articles, nearly one-half were published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine (42%). The most prolific co-author and first author were Freddie H. Fu (n = 13) and K. Donald Shelbourne (n = 5), respectively. The most productive institution was the University of Pittsburgh (14%). Material comparison (19%) and technique comparison (16%) were the 2 most popular themes. More than one-quarter of articles were level 4 evidence (37%). Moreover, the keywords ACL, ACL reconstruction, ACL rupture, knee joint, knee injuries, and human showed the highest degree of centrality.

Conclusion

By analyzing the characteristics of articles, this study demonstrated that ACLR is a growing and popular area of research, with the focus of research varying through timeline trends. Studies on anatomic reconstruction and biomechanics might be areas of future trends.

Assessment and Trends of the Methodological Quality of the Top 50 Most Cited Articles on Patellar Instability

Background

Studies with a low level of evidence (LOE) have dominated the top cited research in many areas of orthopaedics. The wide range of treatment options for patellar instability necessitates an investigation to determine the types of studies that drive clinical practice.

Purpose

To determine (1) the top 50 most cited articles on patellar instability and (2) the correlation between the number of citations and LOE or methodological quality.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

The Scopus and Web of Science databases were assessed to determine the top 50 most cited articles on patellar instability between 1985 and 2019. Bibliographic information, number of citations, and LOE were collected. Methodological quality was calculated using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS) and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Mean citations and mean citation density (citations per year) were correlated with LOE, MCMS, and MINORS scores.

Results

Most studies were cadaveric (n = 10; 20.0%), published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine (n = 13; 26.0%), published between 2000 and 2009 (n = 41; 82.0%), and conducted in the United States (n = 17; 34.0%). The mean number of citations and the citation density were 158.61 ± 59.53 (range, 95.5-400.5) and 12.74 ± 5.12, respectively. The mean MCMS and MINORS scores were 59.62 ± 12.58 and 16.24 ± 3.72, respectively. No correlation was seen between mean number of citations or citation density versus LOE. A significant difference was found in the mean LOE of articles published between 1990 and 1999 (5.0 ± 0) versus those published between 2000 and 2009 (3.12 ± 1.38; P = .03) and between 2010 and 2019 (3.00 ± 1.10; P = .01).

Conclusion

There was a shift in research from anatomy toward outcomes in patellar instability; however, these articles demonstrated low LOE and methodological quality. Higher quality studies are necessary to establish informed standards of management of patellar instability.

Bibliometric profile of the African Academy of Sciences medical and health sciences fellows

The African Academy of Sciences (AAS) is the preeminent science academy on the African continent, but there is currently no information on the academic productivity of the fellowship members. This study investigated the bibliometric parameters of the AAS medical and health sciences fellows. The demographic information (year of induction, gender, and region of employment in Africa) of the 80 medical and health sciences fellows were obtained from the AAS website. Subsequently, the bibliometric information (total number of publications, H-index scores, citation, and co-authorship counts) were extracted from the Scopus database. The majority of the fellows were from the East (36%) and West (33%) African regions (χ2 = p < 0.001); the North (6%) and Central (4%) regions were vastly underrepresented. Although only 34% of the AAS fellows were women, there was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) in the bibliometric parameters of both genders. The year of induction as a fellow and region of employment in Africa significantly (p < 0.05) influenced the bibliometric parameters. For all the fellows combined, their H-index mean (SD) score is 27.9 (17.0), while the median score for the total number of publications is 100, H-index is 27.5, and the citation and co-authorship count is 2,894 and 446, respectively. The fellows from the West African region had the highest number of publications (Mean = 212), citations (Mean = 9,437), and co-authorship count (Mean = 975), and the South African fellows had the highest H-index score (Mean = 40.8). The data presented provide insight into the bibliometric productivity of African scientists compared with their peers from other science academies around the world. Similarly, the data may assist burgeoning scientists aspiring to be AAS fellow set realistic goals toward achieving the stipulated H-index benchmarks.