PDF herunterladen
Methods Inf Med 2014; 53(06): 446-458
DOI: 10.3414/ME14-01-0022
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

Highly Cited Articles in Health Care Sciences and Services Field in Science Citation Index Expanded

A Bibliometric Analysis for 1958 – 2012
Y.-H. E. Hsu
1   School of Health Care Administration, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
,
Y.-S. Ho
2   Trend Research Centre, Asia University, Wufeng, Taiwan
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

received: 10. Februar 2014

accepted: 27. Juli 2014

Publikationsdatum:
20. Januar 2018 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Summary

Objective: This study aimed to identify and analyze characteristics of highly cited articles published in the Web of Science category of health care sciences and services from 1958 to 2012.

Methods: Articles that have been cited at least 100 times were assessed regarding publication outputs, distribution of outputs in journals, publications of authors, institutions, countries as well as citation life cycles of the articles with the highest total citations since its publication up to 2012 and the highest citations in 2012. Six bibliometric indicators were used to evaluate source countries, institutions, and authors. Total citations from the time the articles were first published to the end of 2012 and citations in 2012 only were applied. Additionally, Y-index was applied to evaluate publication characteristics of authors. A high percentage of authors had the same numbers of first author and corresponding author status of highly cited articles in health care sciences and services field.

Results: Results showed that 890 of the most highly referenced articles, published between 1977 and 2009, had been cited at least 100 times. Medical Care and Journal of General Internal Medicine published the most highly cited articles. The United States produced 76% of highly cited articles and also published the most number of independent, internationally collaborative, first authored, corresponding authored, and single author highly cited articles. The Harvard University was the most productive institute and was number one for the total highly cited articles, inter-institutionally collaborative articles, single institution articles, first author articles, and corresponding author articles.

Conclusions: The application of quantitative techniques in the analysis of highly cited articles can improve the researchers’ understanding of the directions in health care sciences and services field. Y-index is useful for the evaluation of contributing authors.

Keywords

Y-index - SCI-EXPANDED - bibliometric - top-cited articles - article life - health care sciences and services
 

  • References

  • 1 Surjan G. How to Use Health Informatics to Manage the Information Overflow Created by Itself?. Methods Inf Med 2013; 52 (02) 97-98.
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Elkin PL, Brown SH, Wright G. Biomedical informatics: We are what we publish. Methods Inf Med 2013; 52 (06) 538-546.
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Windsor DA. Adverse-reactions literature: Bibliometric analysis. Methods Inf Med 1977; 16 (01) 52-54.
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Garfield E. Citation indexes to science: A new dimension in documentation through the association of ideas. Science 1955; 122 3159 108-111.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Garfield E. Contract research services at ISI-citation analysis for governmental, industrial, and academic clients. Curr Contents 1992; 23: 5-13.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Aversa E. Research on research: customized citation analysis for governmental, industrial, and academic clients. Curr Contents 1992; 23: 7-13.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Garfield E. 100 citation classics from the Journal of the American Medical Association. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc 1987; 257 (01) 52-59.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Picknett T, Davis K. The 100 most-cited articles from JMB. J Mol Biol 1999; 293 (02) 173-176.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Dubin D, Hafner AW, Arndt KA. Citation classics in clinical dermatologic journals: citation analysis, biomedical journals, and landmark articles, 1945 to 1990. Arch Dermatol 1993; 129 (09) 1121-1129.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Terajima K, Aneman A. Citation classics in anaesthesia and pain journals: A literature review in the era of the internet. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003; 47 (06) 655-663.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ohba N, Nakao K, Isashiki Y, Ohba A. The 100 most frequently cited articles in ophthalmology journals. Arch Ophthalmol-Chic 2007; 125 (07) 952-960.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Garfield E. The uses and limitations of citation data as science indicators - an overview for students and nonspecialists - introduction to citation data - their use as quantitative indicators for science and technology evaluation and policy making by Garfield, Eugene and Welljams-Dorof, Alfred (reprinted from Science and Public-Policy, vol 19, pp 321-327, 1992). Curr Contents 1992; 49: 3-13.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Garfield E, Welljams-Dorof A. Citation data - their use as quantitative indicators for science and technology evaluation and policy-making (reprinted from Science and Public-Policy, vol 19, pp 321-327, 1992). Curr Contents 1992; 49: 5-13.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Garfield E. Journal citation studies. 8. Some highly cited articles from highly cited general medical and clinical journals. Curr Contents 1974; 27: 5-12.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Garfield E. Highly cited articles. 26. Some classic papers of late 19th and early 20th centuries. Curr Contents 1976; 21: 5-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Garfield E. Which journals attract most frequently cited articles - Here’s a list of top 15. Curr Contents 1973; 39: 5-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Smith DR. Citation indexing and highly cited articles in the Australian Veterinary Journal. Aust Vet J 2008; 86 (09) 337-339.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Brandt JS, Downing AC, Howard DL, Kofinas JD, Chasen ST. Citation classics in obstetrics and gynecology: The 100 most frequently cited journal articles in the last 50 years. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 203 (04) Article Number 355.e1-355.e7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chuang KY, Wang MH, Ho YS. High-impact papers presented in the subject category of water resources in the Essential Science Indicators database of the institute for scientific information. Scientometrics 2011; 87 (03) 551-562.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Fu HZ, Wang MH, Ho YS. The most frequently cited adsorption research articles in the Science Citation Index (Expanded). J Colloid Interf Sci 2012; 379 (01) 148-156.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Aksnes DW. Characteristics of highly cited papers. Res Evaluat 2003; 12 (03) 159-170.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Aversa ES. Citation patterns of highly cited papers and their relationship to literature aging: A study of the working literature. Scientometrics 1985; 7 (3-6) 383-389.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ho YS. Top-cited articles in chemical engineering in Science Citation Index Expanded: A bibliometric analysis. Chinese J Chem Eng 2012; 20 (03) 478-488.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Chiu WT, Ho YS. Bibliometric analysis of tsunami research. Scientometrics 2007; 73 (01) 3-17.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ho YS. The top-cited research works in the Science Citation Index Expanded. Scientometrics 2013; 94 (03) 1297-1312.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chiu WT, Ho YS. Bibliometric analysis of homeopathy research during the period of 1991 to 2003. Scientometrics 2005; 63 (01) 3-23.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fu HZ, Ho YS. Top cited articles in adsorption research using Y-index. Res Evaluat 2014; 23 (01) 12-20.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Eisenberg JM, Williams SV, Garner L, Viale R, Smits H. Computer-based audit to detect and correct over-utilization of laboratory tests. Med Care 1977; 15 (11) 915-921.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Finkelstein EA, Trogdon JG, Cohen JW, Dietz W. Annual medical spending attributable to obesity: Payer- and service-specific estimates. Health Affair 2009; 28 (05) W822-W831.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Coleman K, Austin BT, Brach C, Wagner EH. Evidence on the chronic care model in the new millennium. Health Affair 2009; 28 (01) 75-85.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci 2009; 4 Article Number 50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Costas R, Bordons M. Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective. Scientometrics 2011; 88 (01) 145-161.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Riesenberg D, Lundberg GD. The order of authorship: Who’s on first?. JAMA-J Am Med Assoc 1990; 264 (14) 1857
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Burman KD. Hanging from the masthead - Reflections on authorship. Ann Intern Med 1982; 97 (02) 602-605.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual-framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30 (06) 473-483.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; 34 (03) 220-233.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Mchorney CA, Ware JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). II. Psychometric and clinical-tests of validity in measuring physical and mental-health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31 (03) 247-263.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001; 16 (09) 606-613.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RN. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 1998; 36 (01) 8-27.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive-validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care 1986; 24 (01) 67-74.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Quan HD, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, Fong A, Burnand B, Luthi JC, Saunders LD, Beck CA, Feasby TE, Ghali WA. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care 2005; 43 (11) 1130-1139.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The sickness impact profile: Development and final revision of a health-status measure. Med Care 1981; 19 (08) 787-805.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov-models in medical decision-making - a practical guide. Med Decis Making 1993; 13 (04) 322-338.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Ho YS. Classic articles on social work field in Social Science Citation Index: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 2014; 98 (01) 137-155.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Hansen HB, Henriksen JH. How well does journal ‘impact’ work in the assessment of papers on clinical physiology and nuclear medicine. Clin Physiol 1997; 17: 409-418.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Zhang WW, Qian WH, Ho YS. A bibliometric analysis of research related to ocean circulation. Scientometrics 2009; 80 (02) 305-316.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Zuckerman H. Citation analysis and the complexproblem of intellectual influence. Scientometrics 1987; 12 (5-6) 329-338.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Merton RK. The matthew effect in science, II: cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. ISIS 1988; 79 (299) 606-623.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Ho YS. Comments on “Removal and recovery of Cu (II) and Zn(II) using immobilized Mentha arvensis distillation waste biomass”. Ecol Eng 2010; 36 (06) 832
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Baltussen A, Kindler CH. Citation classics in anesthetic journals. Anesth Analg 2004; 98 (02) 443-451.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Paladugu R, Schein M, Gardezi S, Wise L. One hundred citation classics in general surgical journals. World Jsurg 2002; 26 (09) 1099-1105.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Kelly JC, Glynn RW, O’Briain DE, Felle P, McCabe JP. The 100 classic papers of orthopaedic surgery: A bibliometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92B (10) 1338-1343.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Hennessey K, Afshar K, MacNeily AE. The top 100 cited articles in urology. Cuaj-Can Urol Assoc J 2009; 3 (04) 293-302.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Schein M, Fingerhut A. Where can surgeons publish?. Brit J Surg 2000; 87 (03) 261-264.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Narin F, Stevens K, Whitlow ES. Scientific cooperation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics 1991; 21 (03) 313-323.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Leta J, Chaimovich H. Recognition and international collaboration: The Brazilian case. Scientometrics 2002; 53 (03) 325-335.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Li LL, Ding GH, Feng N, Wang MH, Ho YS. Global stem cell research trend: Bibliometric analysis as a tool for mapping of trends from 1991 to 2006. Scientometrics 2009; 80 (01) 39-58.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Zhou P, Leydesdorff L. China ranks second in scientific publications since 2006. ISSI Newletter 2008; 13: 7-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Campbell FM. National bias: A comparison of citation practices by health professionals. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1990; 78 (04) 376-382.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Teixeira MC, Thomaz SM, Michelan TS, Mormul RP, Meurer T, Fasolli JVB, Silveira MJ. Incorrect citations give unfair credit to review authors in ecology journals. Plos One 2013; 8 (12) Article Number e81871
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Sancho R. Misjudgments and shortcomings in the measurement of scientific activities in less-developed countries. Scientometrics 1992; 23 (01) 221-233.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 MacRoberts MH, MacRoberts BR. Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics 1996; 36 (03) 435-444.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Harwood N. An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic writing across two disciplines. J Pragmat 2009; 41 (03) 497-518.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Tainer JA. Science, citation, and funding. Science 1991; 251 5000 1408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Garfield E. Can citation indexing be automated?. Stat Assoc Method Mech Doc Symp Proc 1965; 1964 NBS269 189-192.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Murugesan P, Moravcsik MJ. Variation of the nature of citation measures with journals and scientific specialties. J Am Soc Inf Sci 1978; 29 (03) 141-147.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Ho YS. Bibliometric analysis of adsorption technology in environmental science. J Environ Prot Sci 2007; 1 (01) 1-11.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar