Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32308931›Full record

ReviewGastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench2020

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

Suhaib Js Ahmad, Ahmed R Ahmed, Karl Friedrich Kowalewski, Felix Nickel, Kamran Rostami, Claire J Stocker, Sherif M Hakky, Rami Archid, Douglas McWhinnie, Ata Mohajer-Bastami and 6 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Review in Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. A Bibliometric Analysis of the 500 Most Cited Papers in Orthopaedic Oncology.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Suhaib Js AhmadUndergraduate Medical School, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, UK.
Ahmed R AhmedDepartment of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Karl Friedrich KowalewskiDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Felix NickelDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Kamran RostamiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Palmerston North Hospital, New Zealand v.
Claire J StockerUndergraduate Medical School, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, UK.
Sherif M HakkyDepartment of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Rami ArchidDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Eberhard-Karls- University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Douglas McWhinnieDepartment of Surgery, Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, UK.
Ata Mohajer-BastamiDepartment of Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK.
Dionysis Skiadopoulos SeimenisUndergraduate Medical School, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, UK.
Sami AhmadIstishari Hospital, Amman, Jordan.
Sami MansourDepartment of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Mohamed H AhmedDepartment of Medicine and HIV Metabolic Clinic, Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Milton Keynes, UK.
Dushyant MitalDepartmernt of HIV and Blood Borne Viruses, Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, UK.
Aristomenis K ExadaktylosDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis 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.

backgroundThe 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.

methodsThis 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.

resultsThe 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.

conclusionThis 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.

Indexed as

Article qualityBibliometricsCitation classicsGeneral medical journalsLevel of evidenceMost-cited articles

Identifiers

PMID32308931
PMCPMC7149815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.