Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37682572›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Global Trends in Highly Cited Studies in COVID-19 Research.

Satoshi Funada, Takashi Yoshioka, Yan Luo, Toshi Iwama, Chikako Mori, Naofumi Yamada, Hideki Yoshida, Kota Katanoda, Toshi A Furukawa

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Satoshi FunadaDepartment of Health Promotion and Human Behavior, School of Public Health, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Takashi YoshiokaDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yan LuoDepartment of Health Promotion and Human Behavior, School of Public Health, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Toshi IwamaOffice of Evidence and Analysis, Japan Society Technology and Agency, Tokyo, Japan.
Chikako MoriOffice of Evidence and Analysis, Japan Society Technology and Agency, Tokyo, Japan.
Naofumi YamadaOffice of Evidence and Analysis, Japan Society Technology and Agency, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideki YoshidaOffice of Evidence and Analysis, Japan Society Technology and Agency, Tokyo, Japan.
Kota KatanodaDivision of Surveillance and Policy Evaluation, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, Tokyo, Japan.
Toshi A FurukawaDepartment of Health Promotion and Human Behavior, School of Public Health, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Since the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak, an extremely high number of studies have been published worldwide, with variable quality. Research trends of highly cited papers may enable identification of influential research, providing insights for new research ideas; it is therefore important to investigate trends and focus on more influential publications in COVID-19-related studies. Objective: To examine research trends of highly cited studies by conducting a bibliometric analysis of highly cited studies in the previous 2 months about COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, Essential Science Indicators (ESI) and Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection were used to find studies with a focus on COVID-19 that were identified as highly cited studies from Clarivate Analytics. Highly cited studies were extracted from the ESI database bimonthly between January 2020 and December 2022. Bibliographic details were extracted from WOS and combined with ESI data using unique accession numbers. The number of highly cited studies was counted based on the fractional counting method. Data were analyzed from January through July 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of publications by research field, country, and institutional affiliation. Results: The number of published COVID-19-related highly cited studies was 14 studies in January to February 2020, peaked at 1292 studies in November to December 2021, and showed a downward trend thereafter, reaching 649 studies in November to December 2022. China had the highest number of highly cited studies per 2-month period until July to August 2020 (138.3 studies vs 103.7 studies for the US, the second highest country), and the US had the greatest number of highly cited studies afterward (159.9 studies vs 157.6 studies for China in September to October 2020). Subsequently, the number of highly cited studies per 2-month period published by China declined (decreasing from 179.7 studies in November to December 2020 to 40.7 studies in September to October 2022), and the UK produced the second largest number of such studies in May to June 2021 (171.3 studies). Similarly, the top 5 institutional affiliations in May to June 2020 by highly cited studies per 2-month period were from China (Huazhong University: 14.7 studies; University of Hong Kong: 6.8 studies; Wuhan University: 4.8 studies; Zhejiang University: 4.5 studies; Fudan University: 4.5 studies), while in November to December 2022, the top 5 institutions were in the US and UK (Harvard University: 15.0 studies; University College London: 11.0 studies; University of Oxford: 10.2 studies; University of London: 9.9 studies; Imperial College London: 5.8 studies). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the total number of highly cited studies related to COVID-19 peaked at the end of 2021 and showed a downward trend until the end of 2022, while the origin of these studies shifted from China to the US and UK.

Indexed as

COVID-19BibliometricsChinaCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualHumans

Identifiers

PMID37682572
PMCPMC10492181

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.