ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2026
Journal quartiles and article-level citation performance: a single-institution case study in academic dentistry.
Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Journal quartiles derived from the journal citation reports are widely used for research evaluation, yet empirical evidence on their relationship with article-level normalized citation impact within specific disciplines remained limited. By examining this relationship using article-level indicators, the study explicitly addresses how journal quartiles function in institutional research evaluation practice, rather than as standalone bibliometric descriptors. This study analyzed 1,180 publications (2015-2024) from a research-intensive dental school to examine how journal quartile related to category normalized citation impact (CNCI). Descriptive analyses demonstrated a strong and orderly gradient in CNCI and raw citation counts from Q4 to Q1. Multivariable Gamma regression with log link and negative binomial models showed that quartile effects persist after adjusting for collaboration type, authorship, document type, and publication year. These findings aligned with cross-field scientometric evidence showing that higher-quartile journals attract disproportionate citation attention. The results extended prior journal-level analyses by showing a strong adjusted association between quartile and article-level normalized performance on aggregate. The study provided discipline-specific evidence relevant to institutional research strategy and publication planning. Future work could assess whether similar quartile gradients appear across other academic healthcare or biomedical subject areas.
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.