Citation classics in pediatrics: a bibliometric analysis

The Impact of the CEDD-NET on the Evaluation of Rare Disorders: A Multicenter Scientific Research Platform in the Field of Pediatric Endocrinology

OBJECTIVE

The database http://cedd.saglik-network.org (CEDD-NET) has been operating since 2013 in Turkey. All pediatric endocrinologists can propose projects to this network. The aim of our study was to determine the impact of CEDD-NET on the transformation of multicenter studies into scientific publications and assess the academic characteristics of the studies that have been transcribed into publication.

METHODS

All the studies that were opened to patient admission on the website between August 26, 2013 and March 1, 2021 were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies were accepted and opened for data entry. The median data collection period was 12 (1.5-24) months, while the median number of researchers participated was 23 (3-180), the median number of cases was 120 (26-192). The average cost was $2113 (1370-3118). Out of 30 studies, data entry was completed for 27. Sixteen publications were produced from 14 studies, 13 ot them have not published yet. The median time from the end of data entry to publication of the study was 686 (168-1608) days. While the median impact factor of the journals in which the studies were published was 1.803 (1.278-5.399), the median number of citations was 6.5 (0-49), and cited by 99 times in Web of Science indexed journals in total.

CONCLUSION

CEDD-NET appears to be productive and effective as all the publications are of high quality that have been published in the Q1-Q2 categories. This study demonstrated the benefits and necessity of establishing nationwide databases, even covering more than one country, in specialized branches, such as pediatric endocrinology where rare diseases are of concern.

Big splashes & ripple effects: a narrative review of the short- & long-term impact of publications supported by an NIH CTSA pediatrics program

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

This review examines a promising new framework for analyzing outputs of pediatric research in the context of translational advancement. We demonstrate a method for evaluating the impact of an NIH Clinical and Translational Science Award's (CTSA) Pediatrics Program through publications that have emerged from supported research. The Georgia CTSA Pediatrics Program provides training, funding, and infrastructure to ensure that researchers have the resources to advance pediatric health. Internal evaluations found that research supported by this program is exceptionally impactful within the academic community and commands high interest within the lay community. Therefore, we examined the impact of this research in both traditional academic and broader community spheres using bibliometrics-the study of supported publications. Bibliometrics describe a pivotal stage in the translational process of bringing scientific discoveries to clinical/community use and include both academic citations and 'altmetric' or non-academic attention. These complementary approaches combine to shed light on the short- and long-term impact of the research on segments of the translational pipeline, including academic literature, community discourse, technological advancement, and public health policy.

METHODS

The authors identified a portfolio of 250 articles supported by the Georgia CTSA Pediatrics Program from 2007-2020. We utilized various bibliometrics to analyze both short-term attention, or 'splash' made by articles, and long-term influence, or 'ripples' made across both academic and public spheres.

KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS

The short-term splash of the portfolio was indicated through publication in high-impact factor journals, peer faculty recommendations, and Mendeley readership, as well as by early altmetric attention in news stories, blogs, and Twitter posts. The portfolio's long-term ripples were demonstrated by high absolute and relative rates of academic citation and by downstream altmetric influence in public-facing documents, including Wikipedia articles, patent applications, and policy documents.

CONCLUSIONS

This article reviews a useful bibliometric methodology for illustrating the waves of impact made by pediatric research. Whereas splash provides a picture of early interest in a publication, a preliminary indicator of eventual utility and impact, ripples provide a measure of the cumulative influence of an article over time. Both reflect opportunities for a line of research to advance along the translational spectrum.

Determining journal article citation classics in school psychology: An updated bibliometric analysis using Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science

Bibliometric analyses have been the primary form of examining and evaluating literature within a field of study. By focusing on citation count and source, researchers have been able to identify journal articles considered to be high impact in reach and relevance, branding them "citation classics" in a field. As time progresses, technology, methods, and metrics for conducting these analyses have improved, and although there have been several studies designed to identify citation classics and patterns of citations supporting them in school psychology literature, none have done so in an updated, comprehensive manner. To address these limitations, the current study aims to replicate and extend these works in three major ways: (a) including 11 primary school psychology journals in the search, (b) using three of the largest reference databases, and (c) collapsing results across these databases to accurately identify the most highly cited articles. The search yielded evidence of more than 12,000 articles accruing more than 500,000 citations. The 100 most highly cited articles were identified, and the majority were classified as explicative (n = 63) and quantitative (n = 70). Themes of bullying, burnout, and teacher-child relationships were the prominent focus. School psychology's citation classics tended to feature quantitative research and examine the relations between constructs, and several revealed a new category of citations classics: the methodological and statistical article.

The Top 50 Most-Cited Knee Arthroscopy Studies

Purpose

To objectively identify the 50 most influential studies in knee arthroscopy and provide an analysis of their key characteristics.

Methods

The Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database was used to gather data and metrics of knee arthroscopy research. The search list was sorted by the number of citations, and articles were included or excluded based on relevance to knee arthroscopy. The information extracted for each article included author name, publication year, country of origin, journal name, article type, and the level of evidence.

Results

For these 50 studies, the total number of citations was calculated to be 12,168, with an average of 243.4 citations per paper. The most-cited article was cited 1,220 times. The 50 studies included in this analysis were published between 1972 and 2013. All 50 articles were published in English and came from 10 different orthopaedic journals. The United States was responsible for the majority of articles (n = 26); however, many other countries were represented. The most prevalent study designs were case series (n = 20).

Conclusions

The 50 most influential articles in knee arthroscopy were cited a total of 12,168 times. The study designs most commonly used were case series and cohort studies. This article serves as a reference to direct orthopaedic practitioners to the 50 most influential studies in knee arthroscopy. We hope that these 50 studies and the analysis we provide help health care professionals efficiently assess consensus, trends, and needs within the field.

Clinical Relevance

This analysis of the 50 most influential studies in knee arthroscopy will provide medical students, residents, fellows, and attending physicians with a comprehensive inventory and citation analysis of the most impactful academic contributions to one of the most important fields within orthopaedic surgery.

Twenty-One for 2021: The Most Influential Papers in Laryngology Since 2000

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To identify the most influential publications in laryngology since 2000.

STUDY DESIGN

Modified Delphi process.

METHODS

Samples of laryngologists drawn from editors of leading journals, organization officers, and thought leaders were invited to participate in a modified Delphi identification of influential laryngology papers. Influential was defined as follows: yielding meaningful practice changes, catalyzing further work as a foundation for an important topic, altering traditional views, or demonstrating durability over time. Quality and validity were not among the selection criteria. Each participant nominated 5 to 10 papers in Round 1. These nominations, augmented with papers from bibliometric analysis, were narrowed further in Round 2 as participants identified their top 20. The 40 papers with the most Round 2 votes were discussed by video conference and then subjected to Round 3 voting, with each participant again selecting their top 20 most influential papers. Final results were collated by the number of Round 3 votes.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 18 invited laryngologists participated overall (all 16 in Rounds 1 and 3; 14 in Round 2). Twenty-one papers were identified as most influential. One paper appeared on all 16 Round 3 lists; three papers with eight (50%) votes each were lasted to make the list. Eleven of these 21 focused on voice; three each related to cancer, airway, and swallowing; and one encompassed all of these clinical areas.

CONCLUSIONS

This list of 21 influential laryngology papers serves to focus further research, provides perspective on recent advances within the field, and is an educational resource for trainees and practicing physicians.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 2021.

Characterizing Highly Cited Papers in Mass Cytometry through H-Classics

Mass cytometry (CyTOF) is a relatively novel technique for the multiparametric analysis of single-cell features with an increasing central role in cell biology, immunology, pharmacology, and biomedicine. This technique mixes the fundamentals of flow cytometry with mass spectrometry and is mainly used for in-depth studies of the immune system and diseases with a significant immune load, such as cancer, autoimmune diseases, and viral diseases like HIV or the recently emerged COVID-19, produced by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. The objective of this study was to provide a useful insight into the evolution of the mass cytometry research field, revealing the knowledge structure (conceptual and social) and authors, countries, sources, documents, and organizations that have made the most significant contribution to its development. We retrieved 937 articles from the Web of Science (2010-2019), analysed 71 Highly Cited Papers (HCP) through the H-Classics methodology and computed the data by using Bibliometrix R package. HCP sources corresponded to high-impact journals, such as Nature Biotechnology and Cell, and its production was concentrated in the US, and specifically Stanford University, affiliation of the most relevant authors in the field. HCPs analysis confirmed great interest in the study of the immune system and complex data processing in the mass cytometry research field.

The State of Pediatric Research in Hawai'i: A Comparative Bibliometric Analysis

The current state of pediatric research in Hawai'i was analyzed using bibliometric methods. The Web of Science bibliometric database was used to retrieve 989 Hawai'i records, which were compared with 264 064 records from the United States (US). Hawai'i was compared to the country as a whole in terms of total output of research, article types, top journals, co-authorship, and subject areas. The research was also analyzed in 2 time periods, 1980-1999 and 2000-2019. It was found that the total Hawai'i pediatric research output has not kept pace with the US output. However, it was found that Hawai'i had a greater share of Asia-Pacific co-authorship. Subspecialty areas of study also differed between Hawai'i and the US, and have changed over time from a predominance of infectious diseases and immunology research to a focus on emergency medicine and orthopedics. Neonatology research has increased locally as it has nationally. Hawai'i authors tend to publish a greater percentage of full-length original research articles in the top pediatric journals compared to US authors as a whole. The set of institutions publishing pediatric research in Hawai'i has diversified over time. This analysis of the pediatric research in Hawai'i can be used by researchers, funders, and policy makers to direct future research efforts to improve the health of children in Hawai'i.

The 100 Top-Cited Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses on Diabetic Research

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyze the 100 top-cited systematic reviews/meta-analyses on diabetic research.

METHODS

The Science Citation Index Expanded database was searched to identify top-cited studies on diabetic research up to March 4^th, 2020. Studies were analyzed using the following characteristics: citation number, publication year, country and institution of origin, authorship, topics, and journals.

RESULTS

The 100 top-cited diabetic systematic reviews/meta-analyses were published in 43 different journals, with Diabetes Care having the highest numbers (n = 17), followed by The Journal of the American Medical Association (n = 14) and Lancet (n = 9). The majority of studies are published in the 2000s. The number of citations ranged from 2197 to 301. The highest number of contributions was from the USA, followed by England and Australia. The leading institution was Harvard University. The hot topic was a risk factor (n = 33), followed by comorbidity (n = 27).

CONCLUSIONS

The 100 top-cited systematic reviews/meta-analyses on diabetic research identify impactful authors, journals, institutes, and countries. It will also provide the most important references to evidence-based medicine in diabetes and serve as a guide to the features of a citable paper in this field.

[Half a century of ANALES DE PEDIATRÍA. Evolution of its main bibliometric indicators in the Web of Science and Scopus international databases]

PURPOSE

To analyse the coverage and main bibliometric indicators of ANALES DE PEDIATRÍA in Scopus and Science Citation Index Expanded of the Web of Science (SCIE) databases.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The evolution of the journal production was identified according to the document types, collaboration indexes between authors and institutions, and citations, and impact indicators (number of citations, impact factor, 5-years impact factor and without self-citations, Scimago Journal Rank, quartile, h index and most cited works).

RESULTS

A total of 10,128 papers were included in Scopus (a mean of around 225 per year) and 1,861 in SCIE (a mean of around 207 per year). The index of collaboration was 4.4 for authors and 2 for institutions. There was international collaboration in 4.2% of the papers. The number of citations received in Scopus (619) exceeded the number of citations received in SCIE (385) by 234. The mean number of citations per paper was lower in SCIE (2.27 in Scopus compared to 1.5 in SCIE). The h index was 18 in Scopus and 14 in SCIE.

CONCLUSIONS

Discrepancies were observed in the indicators obtained in both databases due to the different indexation policies, coverage, and classification methods of the papers. The number of citations, the mean number of citations per work, and the h index were higher in Scopus due to the longer life of the journal in that database. There is a positive evolution of the impact factor in SCIE, of the impact factor excluding self-citations, and of the 5-year impact factor.

Neuroimaging in Psychiatric Disorders: A Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most Highly Cited Articles

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Extensive research has been conducted to find neuroimaging biomarkers for psychiatric disorders. This study aimed at identifying trends of the 100 most highly cited articles on neuroimaging in primary psychiatric disorders.

METHODS

The most highly cited original research articles were identified and analyzed, following searches of MEDLINE and Web of Science All Databases.

RESULTS

The top 100 articles ranked by yearly citation (from 137.5 to 31.1) were published between 1989 and 2017. Depressive disorders (30 articles), schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders (27), autism spectrum disorder (17), substance-related and addictive disorders (7), and post-traumatic stress disorder (7) were among the most studied conditions. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (42), structural magnetic resonance imaging (30), and positron emission tomography (22) were the most utilized neuroimaging modalities. While 85 articles investigated the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders (including 7 focusing on developmental changes and 1 on genetic susceptibility), 15 articles studied the impact of treatment, including antidepressants (6), deep brain stimulation (4), antipsychotics (3), behavior therapy (3), and exercise (1). The analysis also identified the most contributing authors, countries (the United States: 71 articles, the United Kingdom: 8, Canada: 5, and China: 5), and journals (JAMA Psychiatry: 20 articles and Biological Psychiatry: 17). Ninety-eight studies were prospective, and two were retrospective. The sample size ranged from 3 to 1,188 (median: 21).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified intellectual milestones in the utility of neuroimaging in investigating primary psychiatric disorders. The historic trends could help guide future research in this field.