The Hundred Most Cited Articles in Bariatric Surgery

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 25 - Trang 900-909 - 2015
Suhaib S. Ahmad1, Sufian S. Ahmad2, Sandro Kohl2, Sami Ahmad3, Ahmed R. Ahmed4
1Buckingham Institute for Translational Medicine, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, UK
2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
3Bariatric Surgery, Jordan Hospital, Amman, Jordan
4Department of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK

Tóm tắt

Many studies quantitatively analyzing scientific papers have appeared in the last 2 years. Citation analysis is a commonly used bibliometric method. In spite of some limitations, it remains a good measure of the impact an article has on a specific field, specialty, or a journal. The aim of this study was to analyze the qualities and characteristics of the 100 most cited articles in the field of bariatric surgery. The Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge was used to list all bariatric surgery-related articles (BSRA) published from 1945 to 2014. The top 100 most cited BSRA in 354 surgical and high impact general journals were selected for further analysis. Most of the articles were published in the 2000s (60 %). The top 100 most cited were published in 17 of the 354 journals. Leading countries were USA followed by Canada and Australia. Most of the articles published (76 %) were clinical experience articles. The most common level of evidence was IV (42 %). Many of the milestone papers in bariatric surgery have been included in this bibliometric study. A huge increase in research activity during the last decade is clearly visible in the field. It is apparent that the number of citations of an article is not related to its level of evidence; a fact that is increasingly being emphasized in surgical research.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Garfield E. To cite or not to cite—note of annoyance. Curr Contents. 1977;35:5–8.

Garfield E. Random thoughts on citationology. Its theory and practice—comments on theories of citation? Scientometrics. 1998;43(1):69–76.

Link AM. US and non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA. 1998;280(3):246–7.

Fendrich V, Rothmund M. Surgical research in Germany—an international comparison. Chirurg. 2010;81(4):328–33.