A bibliometric study of the top cited papers related to periodontal regeneration

Abstract

This report identifies the top cited papers in the field of periodontal regeneration since inception of the concept. Using the H-classics approach, 132 papers published between 1970 and 2012 were identified, with 230.0 ± 175.6 (mean ± SD) citations and 10.4 ± 11.5 citations/year. There were 46 clinical reports, 28 animal studies, 23 in vitro studies, 30 reviews, 3 systematic reviews, and 2 combined animal and in vitro studies. Analysis of covariance showed that institution number (≥3, P = 0.011), journal impact factor at publication (>3.0, P = 0.001) and study type (in vitro/reviews vs. clinical trials/animal studies, P = 0.024) were significantly associated with citations/year. This study has characterized the most influential literature in the field of periodontal regeneration and serves as a quick reference resource.

The 100 most‐cited articles published in the Veterinary Ophthalmology journal between 1998 and 2022: A bibliometric study

“…Similar studies in other fields often search the entire biomedical literature for publications in their area of interest. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][12][13][14] However, other studies, including this one, may focus on a single journal such as the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG) or Journal of Neurosurgery. 10,11 This study was restricted to articles published in VO to mark the upcoming 25th anniversary of this journal, which is the official journal of the ACVO, and supported by virtually all of the discipline's colleges and societies.…”

“…A study of the 132 top-cited articles in periodontal regeneration identified 53 (40%) basic research articles, 33 (25%) review articles, 28 (21%) clinical case reports, and (14%) clinical studies. 4 On the contrary, a study of the Top 100 articles in neurocritical care identified 57 clinical studies, 41 review articles, and two basic research articles. 3 The Top 100 articles in radiology include 52 clinical research articles, 16 articles with mixed clinical and basic research components, 14 basic research articles, and 18 "uncatergorized" articles that included 6 review articles.…”

“…This report presents the results of bibliometric analysis of the most‐cited articles published in VO. Similar studies in other fields often search the entire biomedical literature for publications in their area of interest 2–8,12–14 . However, other studies, including this one, may focus on a single journal such as the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG) or Journal of Neurosurgery 10,11 .…”

“…11 Indeed, in most of the bibliometric studies we reviewed, it was the only search engine used. 4,6,7,10,[12][13][14] Nonetheless, it is possible that because of this limitation, additional, highly-cited VO articles were missed. Furthermore, the current study was designed to analyze the citing journals of a representative year.…”

“…3 Finally, bibliometric analysis of article citations helps identify essential literature and leading fields of research, contributions of individual scientists, and institutions, and provides a historical perspective of the development and changing landscapes in specific disciplines. [3][4][5][6][7] Although the value of such analysis has been challenged by some, 8,9 bibliometric studies have nonetheless emerged as an important tool to ascertain the most relevant publications in numerous biomedical fields, including both "broad" disciplines such as cardiovascular disease, 2 radiology, 7 neurosurgery, 10 obstetrics and gynecology, 11 and kidney disease, 12 as well as more focused specialties such as periodontal regeneration, 4 aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, 5 vestibular schwannoma, 6 hypospadiology, 8 esophageal cancer, 13 and genetic research of myocardial infarction, 14 to name just a few. However, despite an exhaustive online search using PubMed's "similar articles" function for all of the above studies, no bibliometric studies in the fields of ophthalmology and veterinary medicine were identified.…”