Which Factors Affect Citation Rates in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Literature?

Cheng, Kristie L.; Dodson, Thomas B.; Egbert, Mark A.; Susarla, Srinivas M.

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2017.03.043

Cited by 29 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, high LOE studies tend to get more citations, which was in accordance with prior studies conducted in the field of orthopaedic (Okike et al, 2011), oral and maxillofacial surgery (Cheng et al, 2017), and neurosurgical medicine (Oravec et al, 2019). On the contrary, in another study analysing the 300 most cited studies published in periodontology before 2015, only four systematic reviews and nineteen RCTs among the 300 studies (Faggion et al, 2017).…”

Section: Loe and Scientific Impactsupporting

confidence: 90%

The level of evidence, scientific impact and social impact of clinical studies in periodontology: A methodological study

Meng

Xiang

et al. 2020

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To analyse the level of evidence (LOE) of clinical studies in the field of periodontology, and to investigate whether LOE is a predictor of scientific impact and social impact. Materials and Methods: Clinical studies published in five leading periodontal journals during 2015-2019 were identified. The LOE of included studies were assessed with a modified LOE classification system based on Oxford 2009 LOE, Oxford 2011 LOE and GRADE guidelines. Citation counts were harvested from Web of Science and Scopus. Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) were obtained from Altmetric Explorer. Multivariable generalized estimation equation (GEE) analyses were used to investigate association between LOE and citation count, as well as between LOE and AAS. Results: Among 768 studies included, the proportion of level-1, level-2, level-3 and level-4 was 10.4%, 44.8%, 13.7% and 31.1%, respectively. In the multivariable GEE analyses, high LOE was a significant predictor of higher average citation count (p = .010) and higher AAS (p < .001). Conclusion: The LOE of clinical studies in the periodontal field is relatively high in general, although it varies significantly in different journals. Studies with high LOE tend to have greater scientific impact and social impact than low LOE studies.

show abstract

Section: Loe and Scientific Impactsupporting

confidence: 90%

The level of evidence, scientific impact and social impact of clinical studies in periodontology: A methodological study

Meng

Xiang

et al. 2020

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…And is the gender of authors a factor affecting citation counts? Several studies indicated that a number of authors or the gender of authors are not among the factors affecting the citation received by a publication; factors such as having a higher level of evidence may be more likely to affect citation counts 81…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Top-cited articles in medical professionalism: a bibliometric analysis versus altmetric scores

Azer¹,

Azer

2019

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionCitation counts of articles have been used to measure scientific outcomes and assess suitability for grant applications. However, citation counts are not without limitations. With the rise of social media, altmetric scores may provide an alternative assessment tool.ObjectivesThe aims of the study were to assess the characteristics of highly cited articles in medical professionalism and their altmetric scores.MethodsThe Web of Science was searched for top-cited articles in medical professionalism, and the characteristics of each article were identified. The altmetric database was searched to identify report for each identified article. A model to assess the relationship between the number of citations and each of the key characteristics as well as altmetric scores was developed.ResultsNo correlations were found between the number of citations and number of years since publication (p=0.192), number of institutes (p=0.081), number of authors (p=0.270), females in authorship (p=0.150) or number of grants (p=0.384). The altmetric scores varied from 0 to 155, total=806, median=5.0, (IQR=20). Twitter (54%) and Mendeley (62%) were the most popular altmetric resources. No correlation was found between the number of citations and the altmetric scores (p=0.661). However, a correlation was found for articles published in 2007 and after (n=17, p=0.023). To further assess these variables, a model was developed using multivariate analysis; did not show significant differences across subgroups. The topics covered were learning and teaching professionalism, curriculum issues, professional and unprofessional behaviour.ConclusionsAltmetric scores of articles were significantly correlated with citations counts for articles published in 2007 and after. Highly cited articles were produced mainly by the USA, Canada and the UK. The study reflects the emerging role of social media in research dissemination. Future studies should investigate the specific features of highly cited articles and factors reinforcing distribution of research data among scholars and non-scholars.

show abstract

“…A journal that appears in a focused, specialty-specific journal can positively drive citation counts. This was shown in many fields including oral and maxillofacial surgery (Cheng, Dodson, Egbert, & Susarla, 2017). As we had only 26 reviews that were published in 12 different journals/textbook, this type of analysis was not feasible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Citations of Systematic Reviews in Oral Implantology: A Cross-Sectional Bibliometric Analysis

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation count is an important measure of academic productivity and evidence dissemination. This cross-sectional bibliometric assessment is aimed at identifying predictors of citations of systematic reviews (SRs) published in 2010 in the field of oral implantology. SRs published in the field of oral implantology in the year 2010 in three electronic databases were identified. Following which, data were extracted from selected SRs including number of authors, number of institutions, international collaboration status, number of references, and journal impact factor (JIF). Methodological quality of SR was evaluated separately using the "Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR) checklist. Bivariate associations between the extracted variables, including AMSTAR score, and citation count were examined. Simultaneous effect of all extracted variables and SR citation count were examined by a multivariable linear regression model. In the included 26 SRs, the number of authors and institutions ranged from 1 to 8 and 1 to 5, respectively. The JIF was on average 3.22 (±1.81), and the AMSTAR score ranged from 2 to 10. Total citations ranged from 0 to 123 in Web of Science and 1 to 245 in Google Scholar. Our analysis revealed a lack of significant (p > .05) correlation between the extracted variables and citation count. No reliable indicator that could predict the citation counts for SRs published in 2010 in oral implantology was identified. Of importance was the lack of significant correlation between AMSTAR score and citation count, which underscores the importance of careful appraisal of SR before incorporating its findings in clinical practice.

show abstract

Which Factors Affect Citation Rates in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Literature?

Cited by 29 publications

References 12 publications

The level of evidence, scientific impact and social impact of clinical studies in periodontology: A methodological study

The level of evidence, scientific impact and social impact of clinical studies in periodontology: A methodological study

Top-cited articles in medical professionalism: a bibliometric analysis versus altmetric scores

Predictors of Citations of Systematic Reviews in Oral Implantology: A Cross-Sectional Bibliometric Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About