A bibliometric analysis of the highest cited and highest category normalised articles in radiological literature from 2009-2019 [article]

Nicholas McKay Parry, Justin Rich, Michael Erian, Thomas Lloyd
2020 medRxiv   pre-print
Rationale and Objective; Citation based metrics are frequently used to evaluate the academic performance of a publication. One such metric is the number of citations an article receives, however this is not an infallible index. To account for biases of this metric the category normalised citation index (CNCI), termed impact, may be used. Here the 100 highest cited and highest-CNCI articles in radiological literature, from 2009 to 2019 was performed. Materials and Methods; The Web of Science
more » ... Collection and InCites (Clarivate Analytics) databases were accessed for the citations and CNCI values for articles published in the 186 journals with category 'radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging' between 2009 and 2019. The top 100 articles with the highest citation count and highest CNCI values were collected. Article parameters were analysed including title, year of publication, citation count, CNCI, field of study and modality studied were analysed. Results: Fifty-three articles were common to both lists. Neuroradiology was the most prevalent subspecialty studied in both the highest-cited (n = 68) and highest impact (n = 41) lists, respectively. The most frequently utilised imaging modality was magnetic resonance imaging (n = 64 and 40). The highest CNCI articles demonstrated greater variability and distribution across subspecialties, imaging modalities and year of publication when compared to the highest-cited list. Conclusion: The use of normalised bibliometric analysis tools may remove bias when evaluating research and better demonstrate the breadth of research activity. Use of these tools may provide a more robust and contemporaneous review of the landscape of research within a field.
doi:10.1101/2020.11.14.20231944 fatcat:gdrwgziuovfyjngx4hefhfsrlq