ArticleEuropean journal of public health2024
The 100 most-cited articles in COVID-19: a bibliometric analysis.
Article in European journal of public health, 2024. 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.
- Targeting the NLRP3 Inflammasome with Colchicine in COVID-19: Therapeutic Evidence and Future Implications for Influenza.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Research and conflict: mapping research trends and gaps in Ukrainian Emergency Medical Services- a scoping review.Conflict and health · 2025Review
- A bibliometric analysis of fungal volatile organic compounds.Fungal biology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of COVID-19 Publications Between January 2019 and February 2025 by Romanian Authors.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, sparked by the emergence of a novel coronavirus in early 2020, has prompted a surge in published articles. This study aims to systematically analyse the characteristics and trends of impactful research in the field. The 100 most-cited publications associated with COVID-19 were identified by two independent reviewers using the 'Web of Science' database across all available journals up to the year 2023. Data collected include country, citation count, subject, level of evidence (using Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine System 2011), impact factor, funding, and study design. We identified 394 038 publications, and the 100 most-cited publications were ranked. These were cited by a total of 283 034 articles (median citation = 767), median impact factor of 66.9 and 72 articles with fundings. China (n = 44), USA (n = 19), and UK (n = 13) were the three highest contributors (n = 220 505). Most articles were level 5 evidence (n = 48), followed by level 3 (n = 28), 4 (n = 14), 2 (n = 7), and 1 (n = 3). The main subjects were mechanism of action and structures of SARS-CoV-2 virus (n = 18) and impact of COVID-19 on public health (n = 18). Publications in 2022 and 2023 predominantly focused on the impact of COVID-19. Majority of the highly cited studies were of low-to-moderate quality, with only 10 consisting of randomized controlled trials or systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis. These findings reflect a growing interest in understanding the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on public and mental health. This analysis found the potential for future double-blinded randomized controlled trials to validate existing findings.
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.