Citation classics in main pain research journals

The number of citations of an article in scientific journals reflects its impact on a specific biomedical field and its recognition in the scientific community. In the present study, we identified and analyzed the characteristics of the 100 most frequently cited articles published between 1970 and 2010 in journals pertaining to pain research and related fields. These articles were identified using the database of the Science Citation Index (1970 to present). The most cited article received 3,017 citations and the least cited article received 302 citations, with a mean of 585 citations per article. These citation classics were published in six high-impact journals, led by Pain (84 articles). Of the 100 articles, 39 were observational studies, 25 were review articles, and 20 concerned basic science. The articles originated from 14 countries, with the United States contributing 47 articles; 67 institutions produced these 100 top-cited articles, led by National Institutes of Health of the United States (8 articles) and University College London (6 articles); 18 persons authored 2 or more of the top-cited articles. This analysis of the top citation classics allows for the recognition of major advances in pain research and gives a historical perspective on the scientific progress of this specialty.     

Citation classics: Top 50 cited articles in bariatric and metabolic surgery

BackgroundThe number of times an article has been cited reflects its influence in a specific field. The aim of this study was to identify and characterize the most highly cited articles published on bariatric and metabolic surgery.MethodsThe 50 most frequently cited articles in bariatric and metabolic surgery were identified from the Scopus database in December 2013.ResultsThe median number of citations was 383.5 (range 275–2482). Most of the articles were published from 2000–2012 (n = 35), followed by 1990–1999 (n = 12), then before 1990 (n = 3). These citation classics came from 8 countries, with the majority originating from the United States (n = 34), followed by Sweden (n = 4) and Australia (n = 4). The 50 articles were published in 20 journals, led by New England Journal of Medicine (n = 9) and Annals of Surgery (n = 9). Only 10 of the articles were published in obesity-specific journals. The level of evidence of the 49 clinical publications and 1 animal study consisted of level I (n = 5), II (n = 11), III (n = 9), IV (n = 19), and V (n = 6). Meta-analyses were 16% of the total citations. Metabolic (n = 12) and survival (n = 6) effects of surgery were among the most common fields of study.ConclusionExtending from the early 1950s through the voluminous growth period of the early 2000s, the field of bariatric and metabolic surgery led to the emergence of many top-cited scientific articles. These articles have provided the scientific basis for the only currently effective treatment for severe obesity. Articles published in high-impact journals, innovative observational studies, meta-analyses, survival analyses, and research on postoperative metabolic changes are most likely to be cited in the field of bariatric surgery.     

Analysis of bibliographic citations received by Spanish anesthesiologists for work indexed by Science Citation Index, 1988-2002

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the international impact of articles published by authors in Spanish anesthesiology departments. METHOD: Citable articles indexed by Science Citation Index between 1988 and 2002 and authored by members of Spanish departments of anesthesiology were considered. Citations were counted 2 years and 5 years after publication. Authors and institutions were ranked according to number of citations received. We also determined the journals Spanish anesthesiologists most often chose for publishing their work. RESULTS: Of the 322 citable articles identified, 61.8% were cited in the 2 years following publication (total 587 citations), and 79.5% were cited within 5 years (total 1472 citations). The most frequently cited articles received 17 citations in 2 years and 45 in 5 years after publication. Articles from the Department of Anesthesiology of Hospital Clinic i Provincial of Barcelona received the largest number of citations (333 citations in 5 years). The author with the highest rate of citations received 11.57 per article. The author with the largest number of citations received 86. Anesthesia & Analgesia was the journal publishing the largest number of articles by Spanish anesthesiologists (35 articles). CONCLUSION: This citation analysis shows the international impact of publications by Spanish anesthesiologists.     

Bibliometric analysis of the top 50 most cited publications of the Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

BackgroundThe Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma (JCOT) is one of the top three orthopaedic journals from India. We set out to analyse the top 50 cited articles from JCOT since indexing in PubMed and Scopus.MethodsWe looked into the bibliometrics of the top 50 cited articles and compared citations from PubMed and Scopus, and depicted outputs from VOS viewer analysis on co-authorship and keywords.ResultsTotal citations for top-cited articles were 1076 in numbers, with a maximum of 103.2016 and 2018 were the most productive years. The major contribution was from India with 74%, followed by the USA. New Delhi published maximally at 72%. Clinical topics and narrative reviews were the most common types of studies. Trauma and Adult reconstruction was the most common sub-specialities, and Level 4 was the most frequent level of study. The basic science and COVID-19 related articles received the maximum citations. The authors from Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals published the maximum number of top-50 cited articles in the JCOT.ConclusionsThere is a steady increase in the number of publications in the JCOT, with an increasing number of citation counts. Both the Indian and foreign authors have been publishing in this journal at a comparative rate. Although the citation counts in Scopus are more than those in PubMed for given articles, more than 80% of articles are listed in both databases as top 50 cited articles. The majority of top-cited articles belonged to trauma and adult reconstruction, level III studies, and narrative reviews.     

A Web-based systematic review on traumatic spinal cord injury comparing the "citation classics" with the consumers' perspectives

Although the citation index of an article is not a direct measure of its quality or importance, it is a measure of recognition that may suggest its impact on the scientific community. This study was undertaken to examine the characteristics of the top 100 most frequently cited articles (so-called "citation classics") on traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) that were published between 1986 and 2003, and to compare this selected professional literature with the consumers' perspective on the key issues in SCI research. The 100 top-cited articles on traumatic SCI were identified using the Internet database of the Science Citation Index Expanded and the Web of Science with the terms "spinal cord injury" and "spinal cord injuries." Meeting abstracts, letters, and editorials were excluded. No language restriction was applied. From a consumers' perspective, the areas of greatest interest for people with SCI as reported in two previous large-scale surveys include motor function, bowel and bladder control, sexual function, and pain. The final list of citation classics on traumatic SCI included 82 original articles and 18 article reviews, which were cited 146 times on average. Topics on basic science (63%) were more frequent than clinical studies (37%). The years of publication were distributed in a bell-shape curve with a peak between 1992 and 1994. North American and European centers (99%) led the list of the citation classics. Most of the top 100 most frequently cited articles on traumatic SCI (63%) explicitly focused on at least one of the topics of greatest interest to individuals with SCI. Motor function was the leading topic in the matching list between professional literature and consumers' perspective. This bibliometric analysis, for the first time, identifies the key features of the citation classics on traumatic SCI between 1986 and 2003, a period that represents one of an unprecedented increase in knowledge in this field. The 100 top-cited peer-reviewed articles have been predominantly focused on basic science SCI research indicating a need for greater bench-to-bedside translational studies in SCI research. Although the body of this top-cited professional literature mostly matches with the consumers' perspective, most of this research has been focused on motor function assessment and recovery following SCI.     

The 100 Most Cited Psoriasis Articles in Clinical Dermatologic Journals, 1970 to 2012

Background: Citation analysis is an effective way to gauge the impact of an article on the scientific community. Objective: The purpose of this study was to perform a citation analysis of 24 clinical dermatologic journals from 1970 to 2012, limited to the topic of psoriasis. Methods: The authors conducted a search of “psoriasis” in the Science Citation Index from 1970 to 2012, including articles that have received 100 or more citations. The top 100 most cited articles were further analyzed for country, institution, and study type. Results: Fifty of the top 100 most cited articles were from the United States and 81 of them were original articles. The majority of the top 100 classics were from dermatology programs in the United States, but institutions in the United Kingdom and Germany also made notable contributions. Citation classics in psoriasis were highly published from 1985 to 1989 and 2000 to 2004. Limitations: Limitations included potential neglect of a clinical dermatologic journal and the limited search term of “psoriasis.” Conclusion: The great majority of citation classics were published in the premier dermatologic journals. The top-ranking dermatology programs in the United States produced the majority of the top 100 classics in psoriasis. The high number of citation classics from 1985 to 1989 correlates to the discovery of the immune-mediated pathogenesis of psoriasis at that time. The 21st century brought forth the monumental development of biologic agents in psoriasis therapy, reflected by the high number of citation classics from 2000 to 2004.Psoriasis is an increasingly common disease that has almost doubled in incidence since the 1970s.1 Around the turn of the 21st century, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy was developed and has proven to be a very successful therapy for psoriasis.2-4 The continued monitoring of the safety of these agents,5,6 the search for new biologic agents,7,8 and recent insights into cardiovascular comorbidity9 have made psoriasis a “hot topic” in dermatology research today.One useful method in determining the impact of an article on the scientific community is by performing a citation analysis. Each article that is referenced by another peer-reviewed scientific article is credited a “citation.” Since 1945, the Institute for Scientific Information has recorded the total number of citations for articles in more than 10,000 journals.10 Often, citation analyses limit their focus to the “citation classics,” those articles that have received 100 or more citations in a specified timeframe.11-13Dubin et al13 performed a citation analysis of clinical dermatologic journals to identify the most significant articles in dermatology from 1945 to 1990. In their paper, the value of citation analysis was well-described as a study that “emphasizes the impact of works of colleagues and predecessors, recognizes some of the seminal advances in the field of dermatology, permits discourse on the evolution of medical science, reveals insights into the spread of ideas, and satisfies our curiosity about historical developments in dermatology.”The purpose of the authors’ study was to perform a citation analysis of clinical dermatologic journals from 1970 to 2012, limited to the topic of psoriasis. The authors hope their study will provide the benefits mentioned above to a highly relevant topic of dermatology today.     

The 100 top-cited articles in diabetic kidney disease: a bibliometric analysis

BackgroundTremendous scientific researches have been conducted in the field of diabetic kidney disease (DKD), while few bibliometric analyses have been performed. We aim to identify 100 top-cited published articles about DKD and analyze their main characteristics quantitatively.MethodsWeb of Science was searched with the term ‘diabetic kidney disease’ OR ‘diabetic nephropathy’ to identify the top 100 most cited articles. For articles meeting the predefined criteria, the following data were extracted and analyzed: citation ranking, publication year, publication journal, journal impact factor, country and institution, authors, study type, and keywords.ResultsThe highest number of citations was 4753 times. The median average citations per year was 21.8 (IQR, 16.6–33.0). Most articles focused on the pathogenesis and treatment. These articles were published in 25 different journals and the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology published the greatest number (20%). Forty-three articles (43%) originated from the United States. The University of Groningen was the leading institute, contributing five top-cited articles. The most frequent first author was de Zeeuw (n = 4), followed by Parving (n = 3). There was no correlation between the average citations and the number of authors, the number of institutes, or the number of funds, respectively. Experimental animal study was the research type most frequently conducted (n = 30), followed by observational study (n = 24). Keyword analysis revealed transforming growth factor-β, oxidative stress, proteinuria, and renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system interruption are classic research topics. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, and anti-inflammatory agents are the emerging trends of DKD.ConclusionsThis bibliometric analysis helps in identifying the milestones, inadequacies, classic hotspots, and emerging trends of DKD. Pathogenesis and treatment are core themes in DKD research, while high-quality articles on the prediction and biomarker are insufficient. New analyzing metrics are needed to assess the actual impact of these top-cited articles on clinical practice.     

The fifty most cited Latin-American articles in the orthopaedic literature

Purpose

The number of citations of an article is a marker of its academic influence. Several medical specialties, including orthopaedics, have ranked the articles with more citations. We identified the 50 most cited orthopaedic articles from Latin-America and analyzed the characteristics that made them citable.

Methods

Science Citation Index Expanded was searched for citations of articles originated in Latin-America, published in any of the 63 journals in the category “Orthopaedics” from 1988 to 2013. We created a list ranking the 50 most commonly cited articles and determined the citation density (Citations/years since publication). Information noted for each article included authors, year of publication, country of origin, source journal, article type, and field of research.

Results

Latin-American countries were the origin of 1 % of orthopaedic articles. The top 50 most cited articles had between 29 and 150 citations (mean, 44.48); the citation density ranged from 1.43 to 15.5 citations/years (mean, 5.25). The articles were published in 19 of the 63 journals (11 general and eight sub-specialty journals), and all were published in English. Most articles (n = 29) were published in 2000 or later. The majority were clinical articles (n=40), and the most common fields were arthroscopy (n = 15) and hip surgery (n = 13). The top 50 articles originated mainly from Brazil (n = 20) and Argentina (n = 15).

Conclusions

This top 50 list displays articles that have become important references for the orthopaedic scientific community. Researchers may use this work to make their future publications more influential on future investigators.     

Association of scientific and nonscientific factors to citation rates of articles of renowned orthopedic journals

Purpose

The physician often relies on the prestige of a journal to identify the most relevant articles to be read in his field. This investigation studied associations of scientific and nonscientific criteria with the citation frequency of articles in two top-ranked international orthopedic journals.

Methods

The 100 most (mean, 88 citations/5 years for cases) and 100 least (mean, two citations/5 years for controls) cited articles published between 2000 and 2004 in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery and the Bone & Joint Journal (formerly known as JBJS (Br)), two of the most distributed general orthopedic journals, were identified. The association of scientific and nonscientific factors on their citation rate was quantified.

Results

Randomized controlled trials, as well as multicenter studies with large sample sizes, were significantly more frequent in the high citation rate group. The unadjusted odds of a highly cited article to be supported by industry were 2.8 (95 % confidence interval 1.5, 5.6; p?<?0.05) if compared with a lowly cited article.

Conclusion

Beside scientific factors, nonscientific factors such as industrial support seem associated to the citation rate of published articles. This, together with publication bias, questions whether scientific facts reach the readers in a balanced fashion. Level of Evidence 3     

One Hundred Citation Classics in General Surgical Journals

The number of times an article is cited in scientific journals reflects its impact on a specific biomedical field or specialty and reflects the impact of the authors’ creativity. Our objective was to identify and analyze the characteristics of the 100 most frequently cited articles published in journals dedicated to general surgery and its close subspecialties. Using the database (1945–1995) of the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information, 1500 articles cited 100 times and more were identified and the top 100 articles selected for further analysis. The 100 articles were published between 1931 and 1990, with more than two-thirds of them published after 1960. The mean number of citations per article was 405, (range 278–1013). Altogether, 84 of the articles originated from North America (USA 78, Canada 6) and the UK (12). New York State led the list of U.S. states with 14, and Harvard and Columbia University led the list of institutions with 6 articles each. The 100 articles were published in 10 surgical journals led by theAnnals of Surgery (n = 40), followed bySurgery (n = 15), Archives of Surgery (n = 12), Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics (n = 11), and British Journal of Surgery (n = 10). A total of 80 of the articles reported clinical experiences, 6 were clinical review articles, and 14 dealt with basic science. Eighteen articles reported a new surgical technique and six a prosthetic device. Gastrointestinal surgery and trauma and critical care led the list of the surgical fields, each with 25 articles, followed by vascular surgery (n = 15). Thirty-four persons authored two or more of the top-cited articles. This list of the top-cited papers identifies seminal contributions and their originators, facilitating the understanding and discourse of modern surgical history and offering surgeons hints about what makes a contribution a "top-cited classic." To produce such a "classic" the surgeon and his or her group must come up with a clinical or nonclinical innovation, observation, or discovery that has a long-standing effect on the way we practice—be it operative or nonoperative. Based on our findings, to be well cited such a contribution should be published in the English language in a high-impact journal. Moreover, it is more likely to resonant loudly if it originates from a North American or British "ivory tower."     

Expected versus real impact factors of publications from Spanish departments of anesthesiology (1991-1996)

OBJECTIVE: To identify publications by Spanish anesthesiologists in journals indexed by Journal Citation Report from 1991 through 1996; to count the number of citations received and compare the results with the impact factor (IF) of the journals in which they were published. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Articles for which the first author was a member of a Spanish anesthesiology department were searched for in MEDLINE, Science Citation Index and EMBASE. Only publications for which the IF was known were included for analysis. We then counted the number of citations each article received over the two years following publication, recording the source journal in which the citation appeared and country of origin of each citing author.We then calculated the real IF (RIF) of each article, the RIF of all the Spanish articles, and the mean RIF. Also calculated for each article was the expected IF (EIF), based on the IF of the source journal, the overall EIF and the mean EIF. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-two articles were published; 49 of them were letters to the editors. Specialist anesthesiology journals published 72.7%. A total of 186 citations were received. American authors cited the articles more often than did other Spanish authors. Thirty-seven citations (19.9%) were self-citations. Ninety-two articles (53.5%) were never cited.With letters to the editor excluded, the RIF was 85.48 and the global EIF was 213.28; the mean EIF was 1.734 and the RIF was 0.695. Therefore, the rate of citation of the Spanish authors in the period studied was only 40% of the citation rate of the entire population of authors from all countries. The authors of the published articles worked mainly in hospitals in Barcelona, Madrid, La Coru?a, Valencia, Cantabria and Murcia. Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol (Badalona, Barcelona) had the largest number of publications and the highest EIF (39.41). Hospital del Mar (Barcelona) had the highest mean RIF and the highest global RIF.A gradual increase in the annual productivity of Spanish scientists can be discerned in a progressive increase in the number of publications as well as their EIF and RIF. CONCLUSIONS: Research by Spanish anesthesiologists is concentrated in only a few hospitals. Although the number of publications is increasing, their international repercussion has still not reached the desired level.     

《中华手外科杂志》2005-2009年引文分析

目的 研究<中华手外科杂志>参考文献的引用规律,了解我国手外科领域论文引文的一般规律和科研人员吸收利用科技文献的情况.方法 采用文献计量学方法 ,对该刊2005至2009年共30期942篇文章的引文进行逐篇统计,记录分析,计算引文量、引文率、引文语种、引文类型、引文年代和普赖斯指数.结果 该刊共刊载文献942篇,引文率为87.37%引文量5 390条,平均为6.55条.主要引文类型为期刊(90.71%)和图书(9.29%),普赖斯指数44.9r7%,自引率31.61%,被引用频次前18位的中外文期刊的文献引用量占期刊引文总量的66.21%.结论 <中华手外科杂志>是手外科领域高质量的专业核心期刊,引文的外文语种较为单一,引文内容较新颖.     

《中华手外科杂志》2005-2009年引文分析

目的 研究<中华手外科杂志>参考文献的引用规律,了解我国手外科领域论文引文的一般规律和科研人员吸收利用科技文献的情况.方法 采用文献计量学方法 ,对该刊2005至2009年共30期942篇文章的引文进行逐篇统计,记录分析,计算引文量、引文率、引文语种、引文类型、引文年代和普赖斯指数.结果 该刊共刊载文献942篇,引文率为87.37%引文量5 390条,平均为6.55条.主要引文类型为期刊(90.71%)和图书(9.29%),普赖斯指数44.9r7%,自引率31.61%,被引用频次前18位的中外文期刊的文献引用量占期刊引文总量的66.21%.结论 <中华手外科杂志>是手外科领域高质量的专业核心期刊,引文的外文语种较为单一,引文内容较新颖.     

《中华手外科杂志》2005-2009年引文分析

目的 研究<中华手外科杂志>参考文献的引用规律,了解我国手外科领域论文引文的一般规律和科研人员吸收利用科技文献的情况.方法 采用文献计量学方法 ,对该刊2005至2009年共30期942篇文章的引文进行逐篇统计,记录分析,计算引文量、引文率、引文语种、引文类型、引文年代和普赖斯指数.结果 该刊共刊载文献942篇,引文率为87.37%引文量5 390条,平均为6.55条.主要引文类型为期刊(90.71%)和图书(9.29%),普赖斯指数44.9r7%,自引率31.61%,被引用频次前18位的中外文期刊的文献引用量占期刊引文总量的66.21%.结论 <中华手外科杂志>是手外科领域高质量的专业核心期刊,引文的外文语种较为单一,引文内容较新颖.     

Citation classics in anaesthesia and pain journals: a literature review in the era of the internet

BACKGROUND: The number of citations an article receives reflects its scientific impact. The introduction of internet-based resources to search and access articles has made it possible to review even whole scientific areas. This study identifies the top 50 most-cited articles over the last 25 years in specialty journals dedicated to anaesthesia and pain, respectively. METHODS: Twenty-two journals listed in The Science Citation Index Expanded in the field of anaesthesiology and nine major medical journals were screened using the cited reference option to identify articles cited more than 100 times between 1986 and 2002. The top 50 articles in specialty journals and the top 10 articles in major medical journals concerning anaesthesia and pain were retrieved for further analysis. RESULTS: The most-cited articles in specialty journals were published from 1986 to 1997 and received a mean of 222 (anaesthesia) and 279 (pain) citations. Sixty-seven institutions produced the most-cited articles and of those 28 were located outside North America. The articles were published in six journals led by the Journal of Pain (50 articles) and Journal of Anaesthesiology (39 articles). Forty-seven articles were classified as related to clinical experience, 33 were review articles, and 20 discussed basic science. CONCLUSION: To make an article a possible 'citation classic' in anaesthesiology, it should be published in one of six leading journals and originate from an established institute in North America. Internet resources to publish and cite the literature have to date not advanced any article published in the last 5 years to the top 100 list.     

《中华手外科杂志》2000-2004年引文分析

目的 了解《中华手外科杂志》（下称该刊）引文引用规律及情报吸收能力，找出我国手外科研究领域的文献需求特征，为该学科研究人员利用文献提出建议。方法 采用引文计量分析法按文章发表的时序，逐篇统计该刊2000—2004年间刊载的642篇文章所引用的参考文献。结果 该刊642篇文章中．引文率为78．66％，引文量3127条，平均引文量6．19条。主要引文类型为期刊（87．56％）和图书（11．96％），普赖斯指数44．77％，自引率17．20％，被引用频次前15位的中外文期刊的文献引用量占期刊引文总量的53．36％。结论 《中华手外科杂志》是该学科具有权威性和代表性的专业期刊。引文类型以期刊为主，引文语种以英、中文为主，引文内容新颖．质量水平高。引文数量有待于进一部提高。     

Publications in anesthesia journals: quality and clinical relevance

Clinicians performing evidence-based anesthesia rely on anesthesia journals for clinically relevant information. The objective of this study was to analyze the proportion of clinically relevant articles in five high impact anesthesia journals. We evaluated all articles published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, British Journal of Anesthesia, Anesthesia, and Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica from January to June, 2000. Articles were assessed and classified according to type, outcome, and design; 1379 articles consisting of 5468 pages were evaluated and categorized. The most common types of article were animal and laboratory research (31.2%) and randomized clinical trial (20.4%). A clinically relevant article was defined as an article that used a statistically valid method and had a clinically relevant end-point. Altogether 18.6% of the pages had as their subject matter clinically relevant trials. We compared the Journal Impact Factor (a measure of the number of citations per article in a journal) and the proportion of clinically relevant pages and found that they were inversely proportional to each other.     

Trust, but verify. The accuracy of references in four anesthesia journals.

To determine the accuracy of bibliographic citation in the anesthesia literature, we reviewed all 1988 volumes of ANESTHESIOLOGY, Anesthesia and Analgesia, British Journal of Anaesthesia, and Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia and sequentially numbered all references appearing in that year (n = 22,748). One hundred references from each of the four journals were randomly selected. After citations to nonjournal articles (i.e., books or book chapters) were excluded, the remaining 348 citations were analyzed in detail. Six standard bibliographic elements--authors' names, article title, journal title, volume number, page numbers, and year--were examined in each selected reference. Primary sources were reviewed, unless our institution did not own the source or could not obtain it through interlibrary loan, in which case standard indexes, abstracting services, and computerized databases were consulted. Each element was checked for accuracy, and references were classified as either correct or incorrect. A reference was correct if each element of the citation was identical to its source. Of the examined references, more than half (50.3%) contained an error in at least one element. The elements most likely to be inaccurate were, in descending order, article title, author, page numbers, journal title, volume number, and year. No significant differences (P = 0.283) existed in the error rates of the four journals; the percentage of citations containing at least one error ranged from 44% (Anesthesia and Analgesia) to 56% (British Journal of Anaesthesia). The citation error rate of anesthesia journals is similar to that reported in other specialties, where error rates ranging from 38% to 54% have been documented.     

Factors associated with citation rates in the orthopedic literature

INTRODUCTION: Investigators aim to publish their work in top journals in an effort to achieve the greatest possible impact. One measure of impact is the number of times a paper is cited after its publication in a journal. We conducted a review of the highest impact clinical orthopedic journal (Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American volume [J Bone Joint Surg Am]) to determine factors associated with subsequent citations within 3 years of publication. METHODS: We conducted citation counts for all original articles published in J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000 (12 issues). We used regression analysis to identify factors associated with citation counts. RESULTS: We identified 137 original articles in the J Bone Joint Surg Am. There were 749 subsequent citations within 3 years of publication of these articles. Study design was the only variable associated with subsequent citation rate. Meta-analyses, randomized trials and basic science papers received significantly more citations (mean 15.5, 9.3 and 7.6, respectively) than did observational studies (mean retrospective 5.3, prospective 4.2) and case reports (mean 1.5) (p = 0.01). These study designs were also significantly more likely to be cited in the general medical literature (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that basic science articles and clinical articles with greater methodological safeguards against bias (randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses) are cited more frequently than are clinical studies with less rigorous study designs (observational studies and case reports).     

Basic science research publications in general surgical journals: are they obsolete?

Introduction: Basic science research (BSR) publications in general surgical journals are an important ‘translational bridge’ for practicing surgeons and surgical trainees. However, these articles are considered by some as left-over from higher impact basic science journals, and perhaps as obsolete. The purpose of this study is to characterize BSR articles published in general surgical journals and to analyze their citation frequencies. Methods: All BSR articles published in the five highest rated US general surgical journals (by Impact Factor, ISI Journal Citation reports) in the year 1996 were reviewed, characterized and their citation frequencies analyzed (total citations, citations within a year of publication, and citations in journals with impact factor greater than 5). The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare citation rates in different groups. Results: In 1996, 226 BSR articles were published in the five general surgical journals studied (10-43% of the total articles in each journal). Three fourths of BSR articles were from the USA (12% of total BSR articles by US surgeons in 1996), 12% from Europe and 8% from Japan. In 58% of the BSR articles, one of the authors was a basic scientist (PhD). Fifty-six percent of the publications were presented at a society conference. One in two US BSR publications was funded by the government (14% by private non-profit, 3% industry). On average a BSR article from these journals is cited 32 times (range 1-141, median 11). Half of the articles were cited more than ten times in six years (1-5: 24%; 6-10: 23%; >10: 52%) and 22% were cited twice or more within a year of publication. One in four publications were cited twice or more in journals with an impact factor greater than five (0: 35%; 1: 23%; 2: 17%; >2: 25%). Citation frequencies of BSR publications in general surgical journals were related to the journal impact factor (p = 0.07), to having a basic scientist (i.e. PhD) as one of the authors (p < 0.01) and to the research having been presented at a conference. Conclusions: Basic science research articles in US general surgical journals in the year studied have significant citation frequencies and were not obsolete.