Bibliometric Analysis and a Call for Increased Rigor in Citing Scientific Literature: Folic Acid Fortification and Neural Tube Defect Risk as an Example

Abstract

The health benefits of vitamin B9 (folate) are well documented, particularly in regard to neural tube defects during pregnancy; however, much remains to be learned regarding the health effects and risks of consuming folic acid supplements and foods fortified with folic acid. In 2020, our laboratory conducted a population-based analysis of the Food Fortification Initiative (FFI) dataset to determine the strength of the evidence regarding the prevalence of neural tube defects (NTD) at the national level in response to mandatory fortification of cereal grains with folic acid. We found a very weak correlation between the prevalence of NTDs and the level of folic acid fortification irrespective of the cereal grain fortified (wheat, maize, or rice). We found a strong linear relationship between reduced NTDs and higher socioeconomic status (SES). Our paper incited a debate on the proper statistics to employ for population-level data. Subsequently, there has been a large number of erroneous citations to our original work. The objective here was to conduct a bibliometric analysis to quantitate the accuracy of citations to Murphy and Westmark’s publication entitled, “Folic Acid Fortification and Neural Tube Defect Risk: Analysis of the Food Fortification Initiative Dataset”. We found a 70% inaccuracy rate. These findings highlight the dire need for increased rigor in citing scientific literature, particularly in regard to biomedical research that directly impacts public health policy.