ArticleSpine deformity2026
Bibliometric analysis of the top 50 most-cited articles on cervical deformities: a web of science database study.
Article in Spine deformity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe authors used established citation analysis methods in order to identify the 50 most influential articles on cervical deformities published from inception to 2024.
methodsA two-step query was conducted on the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science platform to compile the final list of fifty articles. Searches were performed in Clarivate Analytics Web of Science on June 29, 2025, using the following Web of Science Core Collection indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI; 1945-2025), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI; 1992-2025), Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI;2021-2025), and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI; 1992-2025). A topic search for "cervical deformity" returned 3235 results, which were sorted by citation count. Forty-one keywords were generated based on recurring keywords in this result list that were related to deformity type, location and alignment, pathology, and surgical procedure from the top 100 articles. A second search using these keywords yielded 2639 results, from which the top fifty most-cited studies were selected.
resultsFrom the 2639 results, the fifty most-cited studies on cervical deformities were identified, with citation counts ranging from 502 to 50. The most-cited article was a 2013 review by Scheer et al., the second most-cited article was a 2013 review by Ames et al. The oldest article in the top fifty list was published in 2001, and the newest article in 2020. The majority of articles were published in Spine (14), followed by European Spine Journal (9) and Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine (7). The most common topics covered were patient outcomes (n = 15) and surgical technique (n = 14). C.P. Ames and J.S. Smith were the most frequently represented authors among the first authors of papers in the top fifty studies. Citation trend analysis demonstrated negative logarithmic associations between citations per year and both time to first citation (R
conclusionsThis bibliometric analysis identifies the top fifty most-cited articles on cervical deformities, highlighting influential contributions to surgical techniques, radiographic assessment, and patient outcomes. Citation-timing analysis demonstrated weak negative associations between citations per year and both time to first (R
Indexed as
Identifiers
41981227What 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.