ReviewCureus2022
Evaluating the Evidence: Scientometric Analysis of Highly Cited Neurofibromatosis 1 Publications.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study of Neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1) is progressing rapidly. This study aimed to identify historical trends in publications focusing on NF1, to find the top 100 most cited publications on this topic, and to evaluate their level of evidence. This study identifies historical trends in publication regarding NF1 with the aim of providing readers useful information about the areas of research being performed, an educational guide to facilitate novice researchers in conducting effective evidence-based medical research, and unique insight into developments and trends of NF 1 research. This study also evaluates the evidence of highly cited papers on NF1. A search of all databases and journals accessible within Elsevier's Scopus was performed on June 27th, 2020, using combinations of the Boolean queries "Neurofibromatosis 1," "Von Recklinghausen," and "NF1," which yielded 13,599 documents. The top 100 most-cited papers were identified, analyzed, and evaluated for level of evidence. Evidence was assessed using the GRADE guidelines. The top 100 most-cited articles span years 1963-2010 and are published in 50 different journals. The average number of citations per publication was 366.5 (range 189-1527). The most cited article is "Neurofibromatosis: Conference Statement" (Stumpf et al., 1988). In this study, the top 100 most-cited works in NF1 are identified, characterized, and analyzed. This study will serve as a historical point of reference for future research, a jumping point for those unfamiliar with the topic, and an educational foundation for future NF1 specialists and researchers.
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.