Detail View

  1. Home

Title: The top cited clinical research articles on sepsis: a bibliometric analysis

Authors: Sadaf Tabassum

Topic: Clinical Research

Abstract:

Abstract

Introduction

The objective of this study was to identify and characterize the most highly cited clinical research articles published on sepsis.

Methods

A comprehensive list of citation classics in sepsis was generated by searching the database of Web of Science-Expanded (1970 to present) using keywords 'sepsis' or 'septic shock'. The top 50 cited clinical research papers were retrieved by reading the abstract or full text if needed. Each eligible article was reviewed for basic information, including country of origin, article type, journals, authors, and funding sources.

Results

A total of 2,151 articles were cited more than 100 times; the 50 top-cited clinical articles were published between 1974 and 2008. The number of citations ranged from 372 to 2,932, with a mean of 678 citations per article. These citation classics came from nine countries, of which 26 articles came from the United States. Rush University and the University of Pittsburgh lead the list of classics with six papers each. The 50 top-cited articles were published in 17 journals, with the New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of the American Medical Association topping the list. The top 50 articles consisted of 21 clinical trials and 29 observational studies.

Conclusions

Our bibliometric analysis provides a historical perspective on the progress of clinical research on sepsis. Articles originating from the United States and published in high-impact journals are most likely to be cited in the field of sepsis research.

Forum


    COMMENT - 1

  • CHRISTINA HENRY PEREIRA (Viewer) 28th Jan 2015 - 12:02 PM
    Hello Sadaf, your post appears to be a direct reproduction of the original article by Tao et al (2012), you could attempt a poster presentation perhaps? I believe for the print format you will need to add your original contribution as well, in the form of a critical analysis of the paper by Tao et al. Here are my suggestions: It is quite obvious that any journal is termed as high-impact only when its articles from recent issues are cited more frequently. This increases the journal's credibility and has a snowball effect, in turn resulting in more citations from that already high-impact journal. Therefore the only interesting finding from Tao's study appears to be that US-originating research is cited more often. I suggest adding your interpretation/justification of this result, identifying the reasons for this finding and your suggestions to how one could help improve the citation rate of research originating from developing countries. Some examples are creating awareness (eg: tie up with academics, etc), increasing market presence (eg: sponsoring events, etc) or similar efforts by journals that publish research from non-US countries.

    • COMMENT - 2

  • SADAF TABASSUM (Author) 28th Jan 2015 - 5:07 PM
    Hi Christina thanks for your criticize suggestion and I respect your suggestion heartly.

    • COMMENT - 3

  • IFFAT AHMED (Viewer) 31st Jan 2015 - 1:26 PM
    The article is well presented as a bibliometric analysis. High impact factor journals can be from any country, not particularly USA. Why do you think articles originating from USA are mostly cited?
    Thank you.

    • COMMENT - 4

  • SADAF TABASSUM (Author) 1st Feb 2015 - 3:40 PM
    Hi Iffat thanks for your ques. and your imp.time which gave you to read my article.I think articles originating from USA are mostly cited because the 50 top cited articles originated from nine countries, with the United States (26) and France (8) being the most prolific
    Countries of origin of the top 50 cited articles on sepsis.
    Country Number of articles GDP per capita (US Dollar)
    ________________________________________
    US 26 47,390
    France 8 42,390
    Germany 4 43,110
    Canada 3 43,270
    Switzerland 3 71,530
    UK 2 38,370
    Belgium 2 45,910
    Netherlands 1 49,050
    Chile 1 10,120

    • COMMENT - 5

  • PRANEETH KUMAR (Viewer) 3rd Feb 2015 - 2:55 PM
    Hello sadaf. article quite impressive.It is very evident that any diary is termed as high-effect just when its articles from late issues are refered to all the more much of the time. This expands the diary's validity and has a snowball impact, thusly bringing about more references from that officially high-affect diary. Subsequently the main fascinating discovering from Tao's study seems, by all accounts, to be that US-starting examination is refered to all the more regularly. I propose including your understanding/avocation of this result, distinguishing the purposes behind this discovering and your recommendations to how one could help enhance the reference rate of exploration starting from creating nations. A few samples are making mindfulness (eg: tie up with scholastics, and so forth), expanding business vicinity (eg: supporting occasions, and so on) or comparable endeavors by diaries that distribute research from non-US nations.

    • COMMENT - 6

  • Stephen joseph atta mensah (Viewer) 8th Feb 2015 - 11:12 PM
    Thanks Sadaf, the article is very informative and insightful. Your article systematically and logically explored top cited articles in sepsis. I like the flow of your article and clarity of the language used. I like the comparison you made concerning the different articles. Keep it up.
    What is the criteria that qualifies an article to be standard and quality?

    • COMMENT - 7

  • ANIL EKNATH KHEDKAR (Viewer) 9th Feb 2015 - 5:26 PM
    Dear Sadaf,

    The review article resembles to the original article. You can utilize more articles review in identifying and characterizing the most highly cited clinical research articles published on sepsis to make it more informative and collective review on this topic.