Factors Associated With the Highest and Lowest Cited Research Articles in General Surgery Journals

Scholarly Impact of Quality Improvement Reports in Neonatology

OBJECTIVE

 Neonatology quality improvement (QI) projects can improve the safety and value of health care, but the scholarly impact of published QI projects is unclear. We measured scholarly citation and media attention garnered by published neonatology QI projects and analyzed project or publication characteristics associated with increased impact metrics.

STUDY DESIGN

 We identified publications between 2016 and 2019 using mapping review methodology. We correlated project characteristics with measures of scholarly citation in Scopus and Google Scholar, and media attention as measured by Altmetrics. We collected Citation and Altmetric data in 2023.

RESULTS

 The search identified 148 eligible articles, with a median citation count of 7 based on Scopus (or 12, based on Google Scholar) and a median Altmetric score of 2. Notably, 66% of articles published in a journal with an Impact Factor (IF) had more citations per year than would be expected from the IF value. Higher scientific citations were associated with articles reporting process and cost outcomes; implementing interventions that addressed family education or organizational change; and using regression analysis. Higher media attention was associated with multicenter projects, longer intervention periods, and projects scoring higher on the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) rubric.

CONCLUSION

 Published neonatology QI projects are well cited in subsequent scientific publications, with the choice of project outcome, interventions, and analytic strategy influencing citation metrics. Adherence to QI-MQCS guidelines was favorably associated with media attention, but not with scholarly citations.

KEY POINTS

· Neonatology QI publications are frequently cited.. · Projects with cost data receive more citations.. · Citation and media mention predictors differ..

Hybrid Gold Open Access Citation Advantage in Clinical Medicine: Analysis of Hybrid Journals in the Web of Science

Biomedical fields have seen a remarkable increase in hybrid Gold open access articles. However, it is uncertain whether the hybrid Gold open access option contributes to a citation advantage, an increase in the citations of articles made immediately available as open access regardless of the article’s quality or whether it involves a trending topic of discussion. This study aimed to compare the citation counts of hybrid Gold open access articles to subscription articles published in hybrid journals. The study aimed to ascertain if hybrid Gold open access publications yield an advantage in terms of citations. This cross-sectional study included the list of hybrid journals under 59 categories in the ‘Clinical Medicine’ group from Clarivate’s Journal Citation Reports (JCR) during 2018–2021. The number of citable items with ‘Gold Open Access’ and ‘Subscription and Free to Read’ in each journal, as well as the number of citations of those citable items, were extracted from JCR. A hybrid Gold open access citation advantage was computed by dividing the number of citations per citable item with hybrid Gold open access by the number of citations per citable item with a subscription. A total of 498, 636, 1009, and 1328 hybrid journals in the 2018 JCR, 2019 JCR, 2020 JCR, and 2021 JCR, respectively, were included in this study. The citation advantage of hybrid Gold open access articles over subscription articles in 2018 was 1.45 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.24–1.65); in 2019, it was 1.31 (95% CI, 1.20–1.41); in 2020, it was 1.30 (95% CI, 1.20–1.39); and in 2021, it was 1.31 (95% CI, 1.20–1.42). In the ‘Clinical Medicine’ discipline, the articles published in the hybrid journal as hybrid Gold open access had a greater number of citations when compared to those published as a subscription, self-archived, or otherwise openly accessible option.

Comparing the similarity and differences in MeSH terms associated with spine-specific journals using the forest plot: A bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

A common concern in the literature is the comparison of the similarities and differences between research journals, as well as the types of research they publish. At present, there are no clear methodologies that can be applied to a given article of interest. When authors use an effective and efficient method to locate journals in similar fields, they benefit greatly. By using the forest plot and major medical subject headings (MeSH terms) of Spine (Phila Pa 1976) compared to Spine J, this study: displays relatively similar journals to the target journal online and identifies the effect of the similarity odds ratio of Spine (Phila Pa 1976) compared to Spine J.

METHODS

From the PubMed library, we downloaded 1000 of the most recent top 20 most similar articles related to Spine (Phila Pa 1976) and then plotted the clusters of related journals using social network analysis (SNA). The forest plot was used to compare the differences in MeSH terms for 2 journals (Spine (Phila Pa 1976) and Spine J) based on odds ratios. The heterogeneity of the data was evaluated using the Q statistic and the I-square (I2) index.

RESULTS

This study shows that: the journals related to Spine (Phila Pa 1976) can easily be presented on a dashboard via Google Maps; 8 journal clusters were identified using SNA; the 3 most frequently searched MeSH terms are surgery, diagnostic imaging, and methods; and the odds ratios of MeSH terms only show significant differences with the keyword "surgery" between Spine (Phila Pa 1976) and Spine J with homogeneity at I2 = 17.7% (P = .27).

CONCLUSIONS

The SNA and forest plot provide a detailed overview of the inter-journal relationships and the target journal using MeSH terms. Based on the findings of this research, readers are provided with knowledge and concept diagrams that can be used in future submissions to related journals.

Gender Disparity in the Citation of Surgical Research

BACKGROUND

Women surgeons face numerous barriers to career advancement. Inequitable citation of surgical literature may represent a contributing factor to gender disparities in academic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional analysis of publications from 50 top-ranking surgery journals in 2017 and 2018, as defined by the 2019 InCites Journal Citation Reports. The citation rate of publications by women vs men first authors was compared. Similarly, the citation rate of publications by men vs women last authors was also compared. Adjusted regression analyses of citation rates accounted for the time interval since publication as well as the journal within which the article was published, among other potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 19,084 publications from 48 surgery journals with a median (interquartile range) of 8 (4 to 15) citations contributing to a median (interquartile range) Journal Impact Factor of 4.0 (3.4 to 4.6) were analyzed. Compared with man-first author publications, woman-first author publications demonstrated a 9% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.91, p < 0.001). Similarly, compared with publications by man-last authors, woman-last author publications demonstrated a 4% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.96, p = 0.03). These associations persisted after multivariable adjustment for additional confounding factors, however, not on sensitivity analysis of 24 of the highest-ranking journals.

CONCLUSIONS

Among top-tier surgical journals, publications by women-first and -last authors were less cited compared with publications by men-first and -last authors, but not among the highest-tier surgical journals. Gender bias may exist in the citation of surgical research, contributing to gender disparities in academic surgery.

A New Bibliometric Index: The Top 100 Most Disruptive and Developmental Publications in Colorectal Surgery Journals

BACKGROUND

A new bibliometric index called the disruption score was recently proposed to identify innovative and paradigm-changing publications.

OBJECTIVE

The goal was to apply the disruption score to the colorectal surgery literature to provide the community with a repository of important research articles.

DESIGN

This study is a bibliometric analysis.

SETTINGS

The 100 most disruptive and developmental publications in Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, Colorectal Disease, International Journal of Colorectal Disease, and Techniques in Coloproctology were identified from a validated data set of disruption scores and linked with the iCite National Institutes of Health tool to obtain citation counts.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the disruption score and citation count.

RESULTS

We identified 12,127 articles published in Diseases of the Colon & Rectum (n = 8109), International Journal of Colorectal Disease (n = 1912), Colorectal Disease (n = 1751), and Techniques in Coloproctology (n = 355) between 1954 and 2014. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum had the most articles in the top 100 most disruptive and developmental lists. The disruptive articles were in the top 1% of the disruption score distribution in PubMed and were cited between 1 and 671 times. Being highly cited was weakly correlated with high disruption scores (r = 0.09). Developmental articles had disruption scores that were more strongly correlated with citation count (r = 0.18).

LIMITATIONS

This study is subject to the limitations of bibliometric indices, which change over time.

DISCUSSION

The disruption score identified insightful and paradigm-changing studies in colorectal surgery. These studies include a wide range of topics and consistently identified editorials and case reports/case series as important research. This bibliometric analysis provides colorectal surgeons with a unique archive of research that can often be overlooked but that may have scholarly significance. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B639.UN NUEVO INDICE BIBLIOMÉTRICO: LAS 100 MAS IMPORTANTES PUBLICACIONES EN INNOVACIONES DESESTABILIZADORAS Y DE DESARROLLO EN LAS REVISTAS DE CIRUGÍA COLORRECTALANTECEDENTES:Un nuevo índice bibliométrico llamado innovación desestabilizadora y de desarrollo ha sido propuesto para identificar publicaciones de vanguardia y que pueden romper paradigmas.OBJETIVO:La meta fué aplicar el índice de desestabilización a la literature en cirugía colorectal para aportar a la comunidad con un acervo importante de artículos de investigación.DISEÑO:Un análisis bibliométrico.PARAMETROS:Las 100 publicaciones mas desestabilizadores y de desarrollo en las revistas: Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, Colorectal Disease, International Journal of Colorectal Disease, y Techniques in Coloproctology se recuperaron de una base de datos validada con puntuaciones de desestabilización y se ligaron con la herramienta iCite NIH para obtener la cuantificación de citas.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:El índice desestabilizador y la cuantificación de citas.RESULTADOS:Se identificaron 12,127 articulos publicados en Diseases of the Colon and Rectum (n = 8,109), International Journal of Colorectal Disease (n = 1,912), Colorectal Disease (n = 1,751), y Techniques in Coloproctology (n = 355) de 1954-2014. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum representó la mayoría de las publicaciones dentro de la lista de los 100 mas desestabilizadores y de desarrollo. Esta literatura desestabilizadora se encuentra en el principal 1% de la distribución de la puntuacón desestabilizadora en PubMed y se citaron de 1 a 671 veces. El ser citado con frecuencia se relacionó vagamente con las puntuaciones de desastibilización (r = 0.09). Los artículos de desarrollo tuvieron puntuaciones de desestabilización que estuvieron muy correlacionados con la cuantificación de las citas (r = 0.18).LIMITACIONES:Las sujetas a las limitaciones de los índices bibliométricos, que se modifican en el tiempo.DISCUSION:La putuación de desestabilicación identificó trabajos perspicaces, pragmáticos y modificadores de paradigmas en cirugía colorrectal. Es de interés identificar que se incluyeron una gran variedad de temas y en forma consistente editoriales, reportes de casos y series de casos que representaron una investigación importante. Este análisis bibliométrico aporta a los cirujanos colorrectales de un acervo de investigación único que puede con frecuencia pasarse por alto, y sin embargo tener una gran importancia académica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B639. (Traducción- Dr. Miguel Esquivel-Herrera).

The use of forest plot to identify article similarity and differences in characteristics between journals using medical subject headings terms: A protocol for bibliometric study

BACKGROUND

Comparison of similarity and difference in research types among journals are concerned in literature. However, to date, none display the methodology seen in selecting similar journals related to the target journal, as similar articles did to a given article. Authors need 1 effective method not only to find similar journals for their studies but also to know the difference in methods. This study (1) shows the similar journals for the target journal online displayed, and (2) identifies the effect of similarity odds ratio compared to the counterparts using the forest plots in Meta-analysis and the major medical subject headings (MeSH terms).

METHODS

We downloaded 1000 recent top 20 most similar articles related to the Respiratory Care journal from the PubMed library, plotted the clusters of related journals using social network analysis (SNA), and compared the MeSH terms in differences in an odds ratio unit using the forest plot relevant to Respiratory Care and the most similar journals. Q statistic and I-square (I2) index were used to evaluate the difference in the proportion of events.

RESULTS

This study found that (1) the journals related to Respiratory Care are easily presented on Google Maps; (2) 10 journal clusters were identified using SNA; (3) the top 3 MeSH terms are methods, therapy, and physiopathology, and (4) the odds ratios of MeSH terms between journals associated with the Respiratory Care showing different from Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmori Dis and similar to Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes within heterogeneity with I2 = 70.5% (P < 0.001) and 0% (P = 0.803), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SNA and forest plots provide deep insight into the relationships between journals in MeSH terms. The results of this research can provide readers with a concept diagram that can be used for future submissions to a given journal.

Evaluating the Highest- and Lowest-cited Research Articles in the Cardiothoracic Surgery Literature

BACKGROUND

Understanding the differences between articles that amass a high number of citations and those that receive very few allows investigators to write journal articles that maximize the impact of their research. There are minimal data regarding these two cohorts in the cardiothoracic surgery literature.

METHODS

We identified all primary research articles from 1998 to 2008 from The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Journal of Cardiac Surgery, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, and The European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (n = 4276). Eighty-seven of these articles accrued 0 or only 1 citation within 10 y of publication. We compared this "low citation" cohort to the "high citation" cohort made up of the 87 highest-cited articles from the same journals over the same time period.

RESULTS

When compared with the low-citation articles, high-citation articles were significantly more likely to be clinical in nature (P < 0.0001), have observational study design (P < 0.0001), involve multidisciplinary authorship (P < 0.0001), and have more funding reported (P = 0.0039). With regard to technical aspects of the article, the high-citation articles were likely to have longer titles (P = 0.0086), punctuation in the title (P = 0.0027), longer abstracts (P = 0.0007), more words in the manuscript (P < 0.0001), more authors (P < 0.0001), more declared conflict of interests (P = 0.0167), more references (P < 0.0001), more tables (P < 0.0001), more figures (P = 0.0024), and more pages (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the year of publication among both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that there are several important distinguishing characteristics that should be considered by investigators when designing and implementing cardiothoracic research studies to maximize the impact of their published research.

Factors Associated with Low and High Article Citations in Four Prominent Orthopaedic Surgery Journals

BACKGROUND

Research is a cornerstone for the advancement of clinical practice and guidelines across all medical and surgical fields. To achieve significant contribution to the field, research must be circulated, read, and understood.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to investigate which factors are associated with higher and lower citation rates in orthopaedic surgery literature.

METHODS

A query was performed to identify all of the primary research articles published between 1998 and 2008 in four prominent orthopaedics journals. From there, the 50 most highly and lowly cited articles were identified and analyzed for various factors that distinguished the highly cited group from the lowly cited group. Various statistical tests were used depending on the type of variable being evaluated.

RESULTS

After data compilation and statistical analysis, 16 statistically significant factors were apparent that differed between the two groups. Seven non-statistically significant factors were also identified.

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates that certain statistically significant factors influence the citation rates of papers in orthopaedic surgery literature. If utilized appropriately, these factors could lead to increased consumption and circulation of future orthopaedic surgery literature.