ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2025
Growth in representation of Saudi scientists among Stanford's top 2 percent most-cited (2019-2023).
Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2025. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Global citation-based databases, such as Stanford University's Top 2% Scientists (SUD2%) database, offer powerful tools for tracking high-impact researchers. Despite Saudi Arabia's growing investment in scientific research, a longitudinal analysis of its presence in these elite citation rankings has been lacking. This study provides the first 5-year analysis (2019-2023) of Saudi-affiliated scientists listed in the SUD2% (single-year category), evaluating their growth in numbers, performance indicators, disciplinary distribution, and gender representation. Data were extracted from Elsevier's Mendeley-hosted SUD2% dataset. The key bibliometric metrics under analysis included the average composite citation score (C-score), citation rank, total citations, and h-index. A one-way repeated measures ANOVA on ranks was used to assess statistical differences between Saudi-affiliated and global scientists. Gender classification was performed using NamSor, based on validated confidence thresholds. The number of Saudi-affiliated scientists in the SUD2% nearly tripled from 556 in 2019 to 1,684 in 2023. Significant gains were also observed in average C-scores (
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.