Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19622839›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009

How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network.

Steven A Greenberg

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 128 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
128citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

128 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Rosetta Statements: simplifying FAIR knowledge graph construction with a user-centred approach.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

68 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Steven A GreenbergChildren's Hospital Informatics Program and Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA. sagreenberg@partners.org

Funding

Gene Expression in Inflammatory MyopathiesR01NS043471 · NINDS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GREENBERG, STEVEN A · 2003 to 2005
$1.1M
Proteomic Studies in Inclusion Body MyositisR21NS057225 · NINDS · BOSTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · PI GREENBERG, STEVEN A · 2008 to 2009
$433k
NINDS NIH HHS R01NS43471NINDS NIH HHS R21NS057225
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand belief in a specific scientific claim by studying the pattern of citations among papers stating it.

designA complete citation network was constructed from all PubMed indexed English literature papers addressing the belief that beta amyloid, a protein accumulated in the brain in Alzheimer's disease, is produced by and injures skeletal muscle of patients with inclusion body myositis. Social network theory and graph theory were used to analyse this network.

main outcome measuresCitation bias, amplification, and invention, and their effects on determining authority.

resultsThe network contained 242 papers and 675 citations addressing the belief, with 220,553 citation paths supporting it. Unfounded authority was established by citation bias against papers that refuted or weakened the belief; amplification, the marked expansion of the belief system by papers presenting no data addressing it; and forms of invention such as the conversion of hypothesis into fact through citation alone. Extension of this network into text within grants funded by the National Institutes of Health and obtained through the Freedom of Information Act showed the same phenomena present and sometimes used to justify requests for funding.

conclusionCitation is both an impartial scholarly method and a powerful form of social communication. Through distortions in its social use that include bias, amplification, and invention, citation can be used to generate information cascades resulting in unfounded authority of claims. Construction and analysis of a claim specific citation network may clarify the nature of a published belief system and expose distorted methods of social citation.

Indexed as

PublishingResearch DesignData CollectionPublication Bias

Identifiers

PMID19622839
PMCPMC2714656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.