ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2021
100 Disruptive Publications in Breast Cancer Research.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation and Comparison of Academic Impact and Disruptive Innovation Level of Medical Journals: Bibliometric Analysis and Disruptive Evaluation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Disruption of trauma research: an analysis of the top cited versus disruptive trauma research publications.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2024Article
- Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer has a rich history of research over the past 75 years. Many studies have had disruptive influences on the field itself. Our study employs a new, validated measurement to determine the most disruptive publications within the field of breast cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsPubMed® database was queried for articles between 1954-2014 related to breast cancer with in 21 different journals deemed important to the field. Articles were then scored for disruption and citation count. The top 100 most disruptive and cited publications were compiled and analyzed.
resultsDisruption score was a distinct measurement from citation count and had low level of correlation. Disruptive publications tended to skew older with the median year of publication in 1977. The score identified a variety of study designs and publication types within multiple journals.
conclusionsMeasurement of the disruptive quality of a publication is a new way to describe academic impact of a publication and is distinct from citation count. Used in conjunction with citation count in may give a more descriptive bibliometric assessment of the literature. Further exploration within the field of oncology is warranted.<br />.
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.