The 100 Top-Cited Studies on Dyslexia Research: A Bibliometric Analysis

Abstract

Background: Citation analysis is a type of quantitative and bibliometric analytic method designed to rank papers based on their citation counts. Over the last few decades, the research on dyslexia has made some progress which helps us to assess this disease, but a citation analysis on dyslexia that reflects these advances is lacking.Methods: A retrospective bibliometric analysis was performed using the Web of Science Core Collection database. The 100 top-cited studies on dyslexia were retrieved after reviewing abstracts or full-texts to May 20th, 2021. Data from the 100 top-cited studies were subsequently extracted and analyzed.Results: The 100 top-cited studies on dyslexia were cited between 245 to 1,456 times, with a median citation count of 345. These studies were published in 50 different journals, with the “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America” having published the most (n = 10). The studies were published between 1973 and 2012 and the most prolific year in terms of number of publications was 2000. Eleven countries contributed to the 100 top-cited studies, and nearly 75% articles were either from the USA (n = 53) or United Kingdom (n = 21). Eighteen researchers published at least two different studies of the 100 top-cited list as the first author. Furthermore, 71 studies were published as an original research article, 28 studies were review articles, and one study was published as an editorial material. Finally, “Psychology” was the most frequent study category.Conclusions: This analysis provides a better understanding on dyslexia and may help doctors, researchers, and stakeholders to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of classic studies, new discoveries, and trends regarding this research field, thus promoting ideas for future investigation.

Trends of High-Impact Studies in Pharmacology and Pharmacy: A Cross-Sectional Study

“…In addition, the geographical distribution of these institutions indicated the same region or neighboring regions, which is consistent with previous studies in the nursing field (Zhu et al, 2020). The largest node of international collaborations was based on universities from England, Australia, the USA, and China, suggesting that international collaborations were critical in the top studies of such fields, which was consistent with the results of many studies (Chong et al, 2021;Li et al, 2021;Zhang S. et al, 2021). This indicates that the academic capacity of an institution is positively related to its cooperative relationship (Chong et al, 2021;Li et al, 2021;Zhang S. et al, 2021).…”

“…First, the InCites tool based on the Web of Science Core Collection was used to analyze the data. Data analysis from a second database might produce different results ( Zhang S. et al, 2021 ). Second, only articles and reviews were included.…”

“…The results might be biased because of enrolled types of studies, especially editorials from top scientists. Third, further analysis of the top 100 cited papers, authors, or institutions might provide meaningful results ( Zhang et al, 2020 ; Zhang S. et al, 2021 ; Zhang Y. et al, 2021 ). Fourth, as there was no clear definition of high-impact papers, we included the top 1% studies.…”

Scientometric Analysis of the Top 50 Most-Cited Joint Arthroplasty Papers: Traditional vs Altmetric Measures

“…Previous authors have also shown that prospective studies attract more interest on social media [ 66 ]. Interestingly, review articles, including meta-analyses, had the highest citation count, but not a higher AAS [ 77 ]. The Journal of Arthroplasty contributes to most of the included studies (30%), followed by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (12%), Bone and Joint Journal (10%), and Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research (10%).…”

Dyslexia: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis

“…Ram ( 50 ) conducted an analysis of dyslexia literature (1967–2016) from Scopus, which mainly studied the document types, trends of the number of publications, most productive countries, journals, authors, and keywords. Recently, Zhang et al ( 51 ) published a paper on the top 100 most-cited studies of dyslexia research. Due to the language and the stages of cognition of dyslexia, there is still a need to carry out a comprehensive analysis on the differences of bibliometric characters and research priorities and hotspots of dyslexia research from a country perspective.…”