ArticleScience and engineering ethics2016
Evaluation by Citation: Trends in Publication Behavior, Evaluation Criteria, and the Strive for High Impact Publications.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- The publish or perish, publish and perish, publish then perish, and now retract and perish cultures in academia.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Review
- A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most-Cited Articles on Skin Photoaging.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Ganglion cysts of the wrist: A bibliometric analysis review of the top 50 highly cited publications.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2024Article
- Critical questions in the evaluation of scientific production for the "Abilitazione scientifica nazionale" (ASN) for academic enrollment in italy.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Definition, harms, and prevention of redundant systematic reviews.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Review
- One size does not fit all: an exploratory interview study on how translational researchers navigate the current academic reward system.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Effects of Photobiomodulation on Oral Mucositis: Visualization and Analysis of Knowledge.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Massive covidization of research citations and the citation elite.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Healthcare Management: A Bibliometric Analysis Based on the Citations of Research Articles Published between 1967 and 2020.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Measuring the growing impact ofBMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2022Article
- Mastering the scientific peer review process: tips for young authors from a young senior editor.Journal of forestry research · 2022Article
- Top 100 most-cited publications in hidradenitis suppurativa: An updated bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Bibliometric analysis of the top-100 cited articles on oral potentially malignant disorders to guide research topic and direction.Journal of dental sciences · 2020Article
- Health policy and systems research publications in Latin America warrant the launching of a new specialised regional journal.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Research trends and characteristics of oral lichen planus: A bibliometric study of the top-100 cited articles.Medicine · 2020Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of the Health Field Regarding Social Networks and Young People.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Characteristics and trends of oral leukoplakia research: A bibliometric study of the 100 most cited articles.Medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Criteria for the evaluation of most scholars' work have recently received wider attention due to high-profile cases of scientific misconduct which are perceived to be linked to these criteria. However, in the competition for career advancement and funding opportunities almost all scholars are subjected to the same criteria. Therefore these evaluation criteria act as 'switchmen', determining the tracks along which scholarly work is pushed by the dynamic interplay of interests of both scholars and their institutions. Currently one of the most important criteria is the impact of publications. In this research, the extent to which publish or perish, a long standing evaluation criterion, led to scientific misconduct is examined briefly. After this the strive for high impact publications will be examined, firstly by identifying the period in which this became an important evaluation criterion, secondly by looking at variables contributing to the impact of scholarly papers by means of a non-structured literature study, and lastly by combining these data into a quantitative analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.