Cargando…

Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review

AIM: This review provides a comprehensive overview of more than 100 of the most cited studies in general medical journals and evaluates whether citations predict the quality of a scientific article. BACKGROUND: The number of citations is commonly used as a measure of the quality and impact of a scie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahmad, Suhaib JS., Ahmed, Ahmed R., Kowalewski, Karl Friedrich, Nickel, Felix, Rostami, Kamran, Stocker, Claire J, Hakky, Sherif M., Archid, Rami, McWhinnie, Douglas, Mohajer-Bastami, Ata, Seimenis, Dionysis Skiadopoulos, Ahmad, Sami, Mansour, Sami, Ahmed, Mohamed H., Mital, Dushyant, Exadaktylos, Aristomenis K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Shaheed Beheshti University of Medical Sciences 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7149815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32308931
_version_ 1783520889706381312
author Ahmad, Suhaib JS.
Ahmed, Ahmed R.
Kowalewski, Karl Friedrich
Nickel, Felix
Rostami, Kamran
Stocker, Claire J
Hakky, Sherif M.
Archid, Rami
McWhinnie, Douglas
Mohajer-Bastami, Ata
Seimenis, Dionysis Skiadopoulos
Ahmad, Sami
Mansour, Sami
Ahmed, Mohamed H.
Mital, Dushyant
Exadaktylos, Aristomenis K.
author_facet Ahmad, Suhaib JS.
Ahmed, Ahmed R.
Kowalewski, Karl Friedrich
Nickel, Felix
Rostami, Kamran
Stocker, Claire J
Hakky, Sherif M.
Archid, Rami
McWhinnie, Douglas
Mohajer-Bastami, Ata
Seimenis, Dionysis Skiadopoulos
Ahmad, Sami
Mansour, Sami
Ahmed, Mohamed H.
Mital, Dushyant
Exadaktylos, Aristomenis K.
author_sort Ahmad, Suhaib JS.
collection PubMed
description AIM: This review provides a comprehensive overview of more than 100 of the most cited studies in general medical journals and evaluates whether citations predict the quality of a scientific article. BACKGROUND: The number of citations is commonly used as a measure of the quality and impact of a scientific article. However, it is often criticised that the number of citations is in fact a poor indicator of the true quality, as it can be influenced by different factors such as current trends. METHODS: This review was conducted in line with the PRISMA guidelines. The Journal Citation Report (JCR) within Incites allowed the evaluation and comparison of articles, published in general medical journals, using far-reaching citation data drawn from scholarly and technical journals and conference proceedings. All steps of the review were performed in duplicate and conflicts were resolved through consensus. RESULTS: The 100 most cited articles published from 1963 until the end of 2018 were identified. The number of citations ranged from 4012 to 31853. Most of the articles were published in the 2000’s, followed by the 1990’s, 1980’s, 1970’s and 1960’s, respectively. All of the articles were published in five journals. There were 50 studies at level II, 28 at level V, 10 at level IV, 7 at level III, and 5 at Level I. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides an overview of the most cited articles, published in general medical journals. The number of citations provides an indication of the quality of evidence. However, researchers and clinicians should use standardized assessment tools rather than solely rely on the number of citations in order to judge the quality of published articles.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7149815
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Shaheed Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71498152020-04-17 Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review Ahmad, Suhaib JS. Ahmed, Ahmed R. Kowalewski, Karl Friedrich Nickel, Felix Rostami, Kamran Stocker, Claire J Hakky, Sherif M. Archid, Rami McWhinnie, Douglas Mohajer-Bastami, Ata Seimenis, Dionysis Skiadopoulos Ahmad, Sami Mansour, Sami Ahmed, Mohamed H. Mital, Dushyant Exadaktylos, Aristomenis K. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench Systematic Review AIM: This review provides a comprehensive overview of more than 100 of the most cited studies in general medical journals and evaluates whether citations predict the quality of a scientific article. BACKGROUND: The number of citations is commonly used as a measure of the quality and impact of a scientific article. However, it is often criticised that the number of citations is in fact a poor indicator of the true quality, as it can be influenced by different factors such as current trends. METHODS: This review was conducted in line with the PRISMA guidelines. The Journal Citation Report (JCR) within Incites allowed the evaluation and comparison of articles, published in general medical journals, using far-reaching citation data drawn from scholarly and technical journals and conference proceedings. All steps of the review were performed in duplicate and conflicts were resolved through consensus. RESULTS: The 100 most cited articles published from 1963 until the end of 2018 were identified. The number of citations ranged from 4012 to 31853. Most of the articles were published in the 2000’s, followed by the 1990’s, 1980’s, 1970’s and 1960’s, respectively. All of the articles were published in five journals. There were 50 studies at level II, 28 at level V, 10 at level IV, 7 at level III, and 5 at Level I. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides an overview of the most cited articles, published in general medical journals. The number of citations provides an indication of the quality of evidence. However, researchers and clinicians should use standardized assessment tools rather than solely rely on the number of citations in order to judge the quality of published articles. Shaheed Beheshti University of Medical Sciences 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7149815/ /pubmed/32308931 Text en ©2020 RIGLD, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Ahmad, Suhaib JS.
Ahmed, Ahmed R.
Kowalewski, Karl Friedrich
Nickel, Felix
Rostami, Kamran
Stocker, Claire J
Hakky, Sherif M.
Archid, Rami
McWhinnie, Douglas
Mohajer-Bastami, Ata
Seimenis, Dionysis Skiadopoulos
Ahmad, Sami
Mansour, Sami
Ahmed, Mohamed H.
Mital, Dushyant
Exadaktylos, Aristomenis K.
Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
title Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
title_full Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
title_fullStr Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
title_short Citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
title_sort citation classics in general medical journals: assessing the quality of evidence; a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7149815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32308931
work_keys_str_mv AT ahmadsuhaibjs citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT ahmedahmedr citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT kowalewskikarlfriedrich citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT nickelfelix citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT rostamikamran citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT stockerclairej citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT hakkysherifm citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT archidrami citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT mcwhinniedouglas citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT mohajerbastamiata citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT seimenisdionysisskiadopoulos citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT ahmadsami citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT mansoursami citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT ahmedmohamedh citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT mitaldushyant citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview
AT exadaktylosaristomenisk citationclassicsingeneralmedicaljournalsassessingthequalityofevidenceasystematicreview