Productive scientists are associated with lower disruption in scientific publishing.

While scientific researchers often aim for high productivity, prioritizing the quantity of publications may come at the cost of time and effort dedicated to individual research. It is thus important to examine the relationship between productivity and disruption for individual researchers. Here, we show that with the increase in the number of published papers, the average citation per paper will be higher yet the mean disruption of papers will be lower. In addition, we find that the disruption of scientists' papers may decrease when they are highly productive in a given year. The disruption of papers in each year is not determined by the total number of papers published in the author's career, but rather by the productivity of that particular year. Besides, more productive authors also tend to give references to recent and high-impact research. Our findings highlight the potential risks of pursuing productivity and aim to encourage more thoughtful career planning among scientists.

A network-based normalized impact measure reveals successful periods of scientific discovery across discipline.

The impact of a scientific publication is often measured by the number of citations it receives from the scientific community. However, citation count is susceptible to well-documented variations in citation practices across time and discipline, limiting our ability to compare different scientific achievements. Previous efforts to account for citation variations often rely on a priori discipline labels of papers, assuming that all papers in a discipline are identical in their subject matter. Here, we propose a network-based methodology to quantify the impact of an article by comparing it with locally comparable research, thereby eliminating the discipline label requirement. We show that the developed measure is not susceptible to discipline bias and follows a universal distribution for all articles published in different years, offering an unbiased indicator for impact across time and discipline. We then use the indicator to identify science-wide high impact research in the past half century and quantify its temporal production dynamics across disciplines, helping us identifying breakthroughs from diverse, smaller disciplines, such as geosciences, radiology, and optics, as opposed to citation-rich biomedical sciences. Our work provides insights into the evolution of science and paves a way for fair comparisons of the impact of diverse contributions across many fields.

Predicting substantive biomedical citations without full text.

Insights from biomedical citation networks can be used to identify promising avenues for accelerating research and its downstream bench-to-bedside translation. Citation analysis generally assumes that each citation documents substantive knowledge transfer that informed the conception, design, or execution of the main experiments. Citations may exist for other reasons. In this paper, we take advantage of late-stage citations added during peer review because these are less likely to represent substantive knowledge flow. Using a large, comprehensive feature set of open access data, we train a predictive model to identify late-stage citations. The model relies only on the title, abstract, and citations to previous articles but not the full-text or future citations patterns, making it suitable for publications as soon as they are released, or those behind a paywall (the vast majority). We find that high prediction scores identify late-stage citations that were likely added during the peer review process as well as those more likely to be rhetorical, such as journal self-citations added during review. Our model conversely gives low prediction scores to early-stage citations and citation classes that are known to represent substantive knowledge transfer. Using this model, we find that US federally funded biomedical research publications represent 30% of the predicted early-stage (and more likely to be substantive) knowledge transfer from basic studies to clinical research, even though these comprise only 10% of the literature. This is a threefold overrepresentation in this important type of knowledge flow.

The narrowing of literature use and the restricted mobility of papers in the sciences.

It is a matter of debate whether a shrinking proportion of scholarly literature is getting most of the citations over time. It is also less well understood how a narrowing use of literature would affect the circulation of ideas in the sciences. Here, I show that the utilization of scientific literature follows dual tendencies over time: while a larger proportion of literature is cited at least a few times, citations are also concentrated more at the top of the citation distribution. Parallel to the latter trend, a paper's future importance increasingly depends on its past citation performance. A random network model shows that the citation concentration is directly related to the greater stability of citation performance. The presented evidence suggests that the growing heterogeneity of citation impact restricts the mobility of research articles that do not gain attention early on. While concentration grows from the beginning of the studied period in 1970, citation dispersion manifests itself significantly only from the mid-1990s, when the popularity of freshly published papers also increased. Most likely, advanced information technologies to disseminate papers are behind both of these latter trends.

Proposal for a Global Classification and Nomenclature System for A/H9 Influenza Viruses.

Influenza A/H9 viruses circulate worldwide in wild and domestic avian species, continuing to evolve and posing a zoonotic risk. A substantial increase in human infections with A/H9N2 subtype avian influenza viruses (AIVs) and the emergence of novel reassortants carrying A/H9N2-origin internal genes has occurred in recent years. Different names have been used to describe the circulating and emerging A/H9 lineages. To address this issue, an international group of experts from animal and public health laboratories, endorsed by the WOAH/FAO Network of Expertise on Animal Influenza, has created a practical lineage classification and nomenclature system based on the analysis of 10,638 hemagglutinin sequences from A/H9 AIVs sampled worldwide. This system incorporates phylogenetic relationships and epidemiologic characteristics designed to trace emerging and circulating lineages and clades. To aid in lineage and clade assignment, an online tool has been created. This proposed classification enables rapid comprehension of the global spread and evolution of A/H9 AIVs.

Scientific telephone: The cautionary tale of the global coverage of lichens.

Scientific history has many examples of profound statements that are later found to be unsubstantiated. The consequences of such misinformation can be dire. In the present article, we present a case where an unevidenced estimate of global lichen coverage proliferated through both scientific literature and popular media. We traced this estimate to a non-peer-reviewed publication from 1987. We found 76 academic articles (collectively cited 4125 times) and 13 other academic documents citing the statistic, citation chains without source attribution, and instances where the number or context was changed. We also found the statistic 37 times in popular media, which is especially concerning, given that these media communicate science to the broader public. We demonstrate how an unevidenced statement can spread, change through time, and ultimately be repeated without demand for evidence. We hope this case unplugs the telephone and provides a cautionary tale for researchers to ensure critical evaluation of citation and communication practices.

Utilizing Relative Citation Ratio to Compare Academic Productivity by Gender in Plastic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The relative citation ratio (RCR) is a bibliometric index utilized to assess research productivity. Mean relative citation ratio (m-RCR) and weighted relative citation ratio (w-RCR) can be utilized to assess individual research quality as well as career-long productivity, respectively. We sought to determine differences in academic productivity between genders and identify demographic variables associated with increased academic productivity. METHODS: A list of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery residency programs was compiled utilizing the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons website. Each program department's website was utilized to generate a list of practicing surgeons and respective demographic information. Both mean and weighted RCR were obtained using the iCite, a National Institutes of Health bibliometric tool. Surgeons were excluded if any demographic or RCR data was not accessible. Chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and multivariable linear regressions were performed. RESULTS: A total of 785 academic plastic surgeons met the criteria and were included in the analysis, 186 of whom were women and 599 men. Both academic rank and model of residency training were significantly associated with gender in chi-squared analysis (P < 0.05). Mean relative citation ratio was higher among men in departments. Mean w-RCR was higher among men of assistant professor status, chief/chairperson status, integrated model of residency training, faculty size ≥six and in departments and divisions. Academic rank and faculty size were associated with higher w-RCR upon multivariable linear regression. CONCLUSIONS: Although differences exist in mean w-RCR between men and women in plastic surgery, gender is not a predictor of increased academic productivity. RCR is an accurate means of assessing gender differences in academic productivity as it comprehensively considers both quality and quantity of research and may be superior to other, older bibliometric indices.

The Gender Gap in Surgical Literature: Are We Making Progress?

INTRODUCTION: The percentage of women in surgical leadership roles is not commensurate with percent of women in field of surgery. Citation indexes are used as proxy for scholarly impact and may serve as an indicator of women's progress in academic surgery. We aimed to evaluate gender disparities in authorship of surgery manuscripts in high-impact journals. METHODS: In this bibliometric analysis of original research articles from four high-impact surgical journals from 2008 to 2010 (period A) and 2018-2020 (period B), the gender of primary and senior authors was assigned by Genderize.io. Number of citations per article was identified via Web of Science. Number of citations by gender of authors was compared across time periods. RESULTS: Of the 3575 articles (Period A = 1915; Period B = 1660), 962 (26.9%) had women as primary authors and 590 (17.2%) as senior authors. Over time, significant increases in women primary and senior authorship were noted from 22.8% to 31.7% (P < 0.001) and 13.9% (254/11,915) to 21% (336/1660), respectively (P < 0.001). Articles written with women primary authors had fewer median (interquartile range) citations than those by men as primary author in period A (39 [17-69.5] versus 42 [20.0-84.0]; P = 0.005). Gender parity was noted in period B (9 [4-19] versus 9 [4-20] citations; P = 0.307). In period A, articles written by women as both primary and senior authors had approximately 25% fewer median citations compared with those by men (34 [17-62] versus 44 [21-86]); P < 0.011), and this reached parity in period B (9 [4-20] versus 9 [4-21]); P < 0.658). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, gender authorship and citations parity are improving in high-impact surgery journals.

The migrasome as a developmental learning paradigm in cell biology.

Migrasome is a newly discovered organelle composed of small vesicular structures enclosed in membrane structures. Since its discovery in 2014, migrasome has attracted increasing attention in cell biology due to its critical role in multiple disease processes. Its pivotal role in various disease processes, including cell migration, intercellular communication, removal of damaged mitochondria, embryogenesis localization, immune cell chemotaxis, and virus transmission, underscores its significance in biological systems. With research on migrasome steadily increasing, it becomes a unique resource for undergraduate cell biology education. For deeper understanding of migrasome, we applied a bibliometric approach. Here we conducted a comprehensive analysis of migrasome research by retrieving relevant literature from databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed using the keywords "migrasome" or "migrasomes." Employing CiteSpace software and Prism, we analyzed annual publication trends, identified core authors and institutions, assessed national contributions, examined keywords, and scrutinized highly cited literature related to migrasome research. This study presents a comprehensive overview of migrasome research, elucidating its literature characteristics, key contributors, research hotspots, and emerging trends. By shedding light on the current status and future trajectories of migrasome research, we aim to provide valuable insights for teachers in cell biology education. We propose for the integration of migrasome research into undergraduate curricula to enhance the understanding of cell biology among premedical, medical, and biomedical students, thereby fostering a deeper appreciation for the intricate mechanisms governing cellular behavior and disease processes.

Efficiency and Workload Reduction of Semi-automated Citation Screening Software for Creating Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the applicability of automated citation screening in developing clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: We prospectively compared the efficiency of citation screening between the conventional (Rayyan) and semi-automated (ASReview software) methods. We searched the literature for five clinical questions (CQs) in the development of the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock. Objective measurements of the time required to complete citation screening were recorded. Following the first screening round, in the primary analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and overall screening time were calculated for both procedures using the semi-automated tool as index and the results of the conventional method as standard reference. In the secondary analysis, the same parameters were compared between the two procedures using the final list of included studies after the second screening session as standard reference. RESULTS: Among the five CQs after the first screening session, the highest and lowest sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values were 0.241 and 0.795; 0.991 and 1.000; and 0.482 and 0.929, respectively. In the secondary analysis, the highest sensitivity and specificity in the semi-automated citation screening were 1.000 and 0.997, respectively. The overall screening time per 100 studies was significantly shorter with semi-automated than with conventional citation screening. CONCLUSION: The potential advantages of the semi-automated method (shorter screening time and higher discriminatory rate for the final list of studies) warrant further validation.

Five decades of research on immediate implant therapy: A modern bibliometric network analysis via Altmetric and level of evidence mapping.

AIM: To conduct a bibliometric network analysis to explore the research landscape of immediate implant placement (IIP) and provide insights into its trends and contributors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Scopus database was utilized as the bibliographic source, and a search strategy was implemented to identify relevant research articles. Various bibliometric parameters were extracted, including publication year, journal, authors, citations, and funding. The analysis involved examining authorship patterns, international collaborations, level of evidence, Altmetric data, and funding analysis. RESULTS: We identified a steady annual growth rate of 6.49% in IIP research. The top three countries contributing to research output were the USA, Italy, and China. Prolific authors were identified based on publication and citation metrics. International collaborations among different countries were observed. The level of evidence analysis revealed that over 30% of the articles fell into higher levels of evidence (levels 1 and 2). Altmetric data analysis indicated no significant correlations between citation counts and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), and conversely a significant association with Mendeley readers count. Funding and open access did not significantly impact the bibliometric indices of the papers. CONCLUSIONS: The focus of research on IIP has been evolving as indicated by an exponential growth rate in this study. Only approximately 16% of the articles fit into level 1 evidence, therefore, emphasizing on higher quality level research study shortage in this field. Modern indices can be used as new bibliometric indicators as they also cover social media and online attention scores.

Is the commercial determinants conversation confined to the health sciences? Potentially, and that's a problem.

The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) are attracting increased interest and are of great importance when discussing how trade affects health. Through a citation analysis of recent foundational CDoH documents (a Lancet paper series and an Oxford University textbook), we find that fully 71% of all citations reference the health sciences. The health sciences may be well suited to documenting the specific pathways of how commercial (by)products and practices harm human health. However, to operationalize upstream solutions for mitigating these harms, our citation analysis suggests that the field can engage political scientists, economists, sociologists, the trade law and business, as well as advocates in civil society and journalism, more so than it currently does. With CDoH explicitly referring to the interaction between commerce and health, CDoH researchers might be uniquely positioned to get health on the agenda of others, which requires that CDoH methods, datasets, evidence reviews, and proposed interventions are drawn from the widest possible range of sources.

A Systematic Bibliometric Analysis of High-Impact Articles in Critical Care Nephrology.

INTRODUCTION: Critical care nephrology is a subspecialty that merges critical care and nephrology in response to shared pathobiology, clinical care, and technological innovations. To date, there has been no description of the highest impact articles. Accordingly, we systematically identified high impact articles in critical care nephrology. METHODS: This was a bibliometric analysis. The search was developed by a research librarian. Web of Science was searched for articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2020. Articles required a minimum of 30 citations, publication in English language, and reporting of primary (or secondary) original data. Articles were screened by two reviewers for eligibility and further adjudicated by three experts. The "Top 100" articles were hierarchically ranked by adjudication, citations in the 2 years following publication and journal impact factor (IF). For each article, we extracted detailed bibliometric data. Risk of bias was assessed for randomized trials by the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: The search yielded 2,805 articles. Following initial screening, 307 articles were selected for full review and adjudication. The Top 100 articles were published across 20 journals (median [IQR] IF 10.6 [8.9-56.3]), 38% were published in the 5 years ending in 2020 and 62% were open access. The agreement between adjudicators was excellent (intraclass correlation, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99). Of the Top 100, 44% were randomized trials, 35% were observational, 14% were systematic reviews, 6% were nonrandomized interventional studies and one article was a consensus document. The risk of bias among randomized trials was low. Common subgroup themes were RRT (42%), AKI (30%), fluids/resuscitation (14%), pediatrics (10%), interventions (8%), and perioperative care (6%). The citations for the Top 100 articles were 175 (95-393) and 9 were cited >1,000 times. CONCLUSION: Critical care nephrology has matured as an important subspecialty of critical care and nephrology. These high impact papers have focused largely on original studies, mostly clinical trials, within a few core themes. This list can be leveraged for curricula development, to stimulate research, and for quality assurance.

Gender distribution in publishing in five leading optometry journals.

PURPOSE: To explore gender distribution in authorship and citation parameters of articles published in five optometry journals included in the Ophthalmology category of Journal Citation Reports. METHODS: The Scopus database was used to retrieve all citable articles published in 2011 and 2021 in Optometry and Vision Science, Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, Clinical Experimental Optometry, Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, and Eye and Contact Lens. Gender of the first, last and single authors of all articles, and citation parameters of articles published in 2011 up to May 2023 were determined. Gender of the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board of these journals was investigated (May 2023). RESULTS: Only one journal had a female editor-in-chief and three journals had more males than females in their editorial board. In 2011 and 2021, respectively, 40.1% and 48.0% of articles had female as the first authors ( χ 1 , 948 2 = 5.77; p = 0.02), and 32.7% and 39.6% had female as the last authors ( χ 1 , 948 2 = 4.61; p = 0.03). Gender parity was observed in one journal for the first author and none for the last author in 2011, and in three journals for the first author and one for the last author in 2021. Regarding combinations of male (M) and female (F) first and last authorship positions, the authors of articles in 2011 were MM (44.5%), FM (22.8%), FF (17.3%) and MF (15.4%), and MM (34.6%), FM (25.8%), FF (22.1%) and MF (17.5%) in 2021. Differences between 2011 and 2021 were statistically significant ( χ 3 , 948 2 = 9.80; p = 0.02). The proportion of authorship combinations did not show statistically significant differences among journals in 2011 or in 2021. Neither citation nor self-citation were influenced by gender. CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparities persist in optometry journals, with females being under-represented in senior and leadership positions. Increasing the awareness of gender disparity in authorship is a necessary step towards ensuring fairness in science in general, and optometry in particular.

The impact of open access on citations, Pageviews, and downloads: a scientometric analysis in Postgraduate Medical Journal.

PURPOSE: The influence of Open Access (OA) on the citation impact of scholarly articles remains a topic of considerable debate. This study aims to elucidate the relationship between OA publication and citation metrics, as well as article visibility, within the context of the Postgraduate Medical Journal (PMJ). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 373 articles published in PMJ between 2020 and 2021. Data on OA status, citations, page views, PDF downloads, and other relevant variables were extracted from Journal Citation Reports and PMJ's official website. Multivariable linear regression and other statistical analyses were used to assess the impact of OA on these metrics. RESULTS: OA articles (n = 78) demonstrated significantly higher citation counts, page views, and PDF downloads compared with subscription-based articles (n = 295). Specifically, OA articles showed a significant increase in citation frequency with a ß coefficient of 25.08 and a 95% CI of 17.168-32.992 (P < .001). Similarly, OA status was independently associated with increases in page views [ß = 288.636, 95%CI: 177.749-399.524, P < .001] and PDF downloads [ß = 118.966, 95%CI: 86.357-151.575, P < .001]. Strong correlations among total citations, page views, and PDF downloads were observed in both OA and subscription articles. CONCLUSION: The study highlights a significant and independent association of OA publishing with increased citation counts, page views, and PDF downloads in PMJ, suggesting that OA articles have broader reach and greater visibility. Further research, including randomized controlled studies across various journals, is needed to confirm these findings and explore the full impact of OA publishing.

How Much Do Altmetric Scores Correlate with Bibliometric Scores? Analysis of the Most-Cited 100 Articles about the Holmium Laser Enucleation Prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: In addition to bibliometric scores, which are an indicator of academic popularity, it has become frequently used in altmetric scoring that shows the visibility of articles on social media and the internet. In this study, 100 most-cited studies on holmium laser enucleation prostatectomy (HoLEP) were examined, and it was investigated whether the number of citations per year of these studies was affected by altmetric and bibliometric scores. METHODS: The 100 most-cited HoLEP articles between 2000 and 2020 were included in the study. Some bibliometric scores such as h-indexes, impact factors, Scientific Journal Rankings (SJR) scores of the journals and demographics of the articles (such as the number of the citations per year, total number of citations, and total altmetric scores) were recorded. The effects of altmetric and bibliometric scores on the number of citations per year were evaluated by correlation analysis. RESULTS: The median number of citations per year of the articles was 5.88 (4.69-8.42). It was determined that altmetric scores were not an effective factor on the number of citations per year (p = 0.335). A moderate relationship was found between the journal impact factor and the number of citations per year (p < 0.001, r = 0.471, R2 = 0.251). Journal h-index (p < 0.001, r = 0.424, R2 = 0.084), the SJR score (p < 0.001, r = 0.374, R2 = 0.254), and the publication year of the article (p = 0.001, r = 0.326, R2 = 0.023) were significantly but weakly correlated with the median number of citations per year. CONCLUSION: It was seen that the number of citations per year, which is the most important academic quality indicator, is not related to the altmetric scores. In addition, traditional bibliometric parameters still maintain their effectiveness on the number of citations.

The most influential articles on stem cells in intervertebral disc degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Stem cell-related studies have been increasingly conducted to facilitate the regeneration of degenerative discs. However, analyses of high-impact articles focused on this topic are rare. This study aimed to determine and summarize the most-cited studies examining stem cells in the context of intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD). METHODS: We searched the Web of Science (WoS) database for stem cell-related articles in IDD, and the 50 highest-cited papers were summarized. A correlation analysis was conducted to determine the relationship among WoS citations, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), and Dimensions. RESULTS: The number of citations of the top 50 manuscripts ranged from 92 to 370. The top three countries were the United States (14), China (10), and Japan (9). Spine (12) was the most prevalent journal, and this was followed by Biomaterials (6). Bone marrow-derived stem cells were the most common subject (38), and they were followed by nucleus pulposus-derived stem cells (4) and annulus fibrosus-derived stem cells (4). Humans were the most studied species (31), and the next most studied were rabbits (9) and rats (7). There was a very high correlation between WoS and Dimension citations (p < 0.001, r = 0.937). CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, the highest impact articles examining stem cells in the context of IDD were assessed together. The current study provides a deepened understanding of historical studies focused on stem cells in IDD and is beneficial for future studies in this field.

Investigating the citing communities around three leading health-system frameworks.

Of numerous proposed frameworks for analyzing and impacting health systems, three stand out for the large number of publications that cite them and for their links to influential international institutions: Murray and Frenk (Bull World Health Organ 78:717-31, 2000) connected initially to the World Health Organization (WHO) and then to the Global Burden of Disease Project; Roberts et al. (Getting health reform right: a guide to improving performance and equity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004) sponsored by the World Bank/Harvard Flagship Program; and de Savigny and Adam (Systems thinking for health systems strengthening, WHO, 2009) linked to the WHO and the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research. In this paper, we examine the citation communities that form around these works to better understand the underlying logic of these citation grouping as well as the dynamics of Global Health research on health systems. We conclude that these groupings are largely independent of one another, reflecting a range of factors including the goals of each framework and the problems that it was meant to explore, the prestige and authority of institutions and individuals associated with these frameworks, and the intellectual and geographic proximity of the citing researchers to each other and to the framework authors.

The Automated Systematic Search Deduplicator (ASySD): a rapid, open-source, interoperable tool to remove duplicate citations in biomedical systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Researchers performing high-quality systematic reviews search across multiple databases to identify relevant evidence. However, the same publication is often retrieved from several databases. Identifying and removing such duplicates ("deduplication") can be extremely time-consuming, but failure to remove these citations can lead to the wrongful inclusion of duplicate data. Many existing tools are not sensitive enough, lack interoperability with other tools, are not freely accessible, or are difficult to use without programming knowledge. Here, we report the performance of our Automated Systematic Search Deduplicator (ASySD), a novel tool to perform automated deduplication of systematic searches for biomedical reviews. METHODS: We evaluated ASySD's performance on 5 unseen biomedical systematic search datasets of various sizes (1845-79,880 citations). We compared the performance of ASySD with EndNote's automated deduplication option and with the Systematic Review Assistant Deduplication Module (SRA-DM). RESULTS: ASySD identified more duplicates than either SRA-DM or EndNote, with a sensitivity in different datasets of 0.95 to 0.99. The false-positive rate was comparable to human performance, with a specificity of > 0.99. The tool took less than 1 h to identify and remove duplicates within each dataset. CONCLUSIONS: For duplicate removal in biomedical systematic reviews, ASySD is a highly sensitive, reliable, and time-saving tool. It is open source and freely available online as both an R package and a user-friendly web application.

Exercise training and chronic kidney disease: characterization and bibliometrics of citation classics of clinical intervention trials.

BACKGROUND: Exercise research targeting chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been conducted for more than 30 years, and the benefits of exercise for CKD patients have been progressively demonstrated. This study analyzes citation classics on clinical intervention trials on exercise training and CKD to describe the research landscape and hotspots through bibliometric analysis. METHODS: To identify clinical trials of exercise training interventions for CKD with more than 100 citations from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Extracted bibliometric information, participant information, and study characteristics of the included articles. The total citations, annual average citations, publication of year, author keywords, and study-related data were bibliometric analyzed and described using Excel 2019 and VOSviewer software. RESULTS: A total of 30 citation classics were included, with a total citation frequency of 102 to 279 (mean ± standard deviation: 148.4 ± 49.4). The American Journal of Kidney Diseases (n = 7) published the most (n = 7) classic citations in the field of CKD exercise research, and the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology was the most cited. The hotspot of research around CKD and exercise training interventions focused on population (hemodialysis and end-stage renal disease), exercise type (resistance training, yoga, and leg-cycling), and outcomes (cardiovascular indices, physical performance, psychological status, kidney function, physical activity). Reported dropout rates ranged from 0.0% to 47.4%. CONCLUSION: A bibliometric analysis of citation classics on exercise training and CKD highlights the potential benefits of exercise as a non-pharmacological therapy for patients with CKD, as well as developments and hotspots in the field.