ArticleTurkish journal of urology2018
The top 100 cited articles on urological emergencies: A bibliometric analysis.
Article in Turkish journal of urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The top 100 cited articles in menstrual health among adolescent girls: a citation analysis.Reproductive health · 2023Article
- Update of the 100 Most Cited Articles on Breast Cancer: A Bibliometric Analysis.European journal of breast health · 2022Article
- The Most Highly Cited Publications on Basketball Originate From English-Speaking Countries, Are Published After 2000, Are Focused on Medicine-Related Topics, and Are Level III Evidence.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- The top 100 cited articles in pediatric urology: A bibliometric analysis.Journal of pediatric urology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn this study, we bibliometrically evaluated the top 100 cited articles on urological emergencies published since 1975 with a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary perspective. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe obtained the data for this study from the Thomson Reuters Web of Science and PubMed. We determined 360 articles which were related directly or indirectly to urological emergencies between 1975 and 2017 and analyzed retrospectively the top 100 cited articles among these.
resultsThe mean citation impact factor of the top 100 cited articles was 25.8±50.1 (range: 4-467) between 1991 and 2014. We determined that classical articles were cited for 2588 times and the total number of self-citations was 23 (0.8%). Highest publication rate per year was in 2006 (n=9). Among the institutions which published ≥2 articles per year University of Texas led the way with 5 articles. The top 100 articles came from 27 countries and 58% of these are from the USA (n=29), the United Kingdom (n=23) and Germany (n=6). For the top 3 journals of the 33 of top 100 articles most frequently cited were published in journals with an impact factor ≥2 namely, Journal of Urology (n=15), British Journal of Urology International (n=13) and Urology (n=5) respectively. The most frequently cited main topics were penile emergencies with 22 articles and acute scrotal problems with 15 articles. Most of the classical articles on urological emergencies were based on clinical researches (n=95) and also we found that the average level of evidence for the top 100 cited articles was 4.16 (range: 1-5). Mostly preferred publishing language was English among this scientific papers (n=90).
conclusionAlthough not considered as a completely unbiased and adequate criterion for scientific evaluations, analysis of the top 100 cited articles provides us with important current data on urological emergencies.
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.