Analysis of the Types of Retracted COVID-19 Articles Published in PubMed-Listed Journals.

OBJECTIVES: Periodically, medical publications are retracted. The reasons vary from minor situations, such as author attributions, which do not undermine the validity of the data or the analysis in the article, to serious reasons, such as fraud. Understanding the reasons for retraction can provide important information for clinicians, educators, researchers, journals, and editorial boards. METHODS: The PubMed database was searched using the term "COVID-19" (coronavirus disease 2019) and the term limitation "retracted publication." The characteristics of the journals with retracted articles, the types of article, and the reasons for retraction were analyzed. RESULTS: This search recovered 196 articles that had been retracted. These retractions were published in 179 different journals; 14 journals had >1 retracted article. The mean impact factor of these journals was 8.4, with a range of 0.32-168.9. The most frequent reasons for retractions were duplicate publication, concerns about data validity and analysis, concerns about peer review, author request, and the lack of permission or ethical violation. There were significant differences between the types of article and the reasons for retraction but no consistent pattern. A more detailed analysis of two particular retractions demonstrates the complexity and the effort required to make decisions about article retractions. CONCLUSIONS: The retraction of published articles presents a significant challenge to journals, editorial boards, peer reviewers, and authors. This process has the potential to provide important benefits; it also has the potential to undermine confidence in both research and the editorial process.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Alopecia Areata Literature over the Past 50 Years.

BACKGROUND: An extensive body of literature has been published regarding alopecia areata (AA) in the past 50 years. The current paper used a bibliometric analysis (BA) to identify high-quality research articles using criteria such as annual citations (ACs) and journal impact factor. OBJECTIVES: To identify and analyze the top 100 most cited articles in AA scientific literature over the past 50 years using BA methods. METHODS: Web of Science (webOS) citation indexing database was used, on April 4th, 2023, to identify the most cited articles on AA. Articles were ranked by their ACs. Data sets were then subdivided into corresponding and senior authors, year of publication, journal and impact factor, total citations according to webOS database, ACs, affiliation, country of origin, manuscript type, design, focus, and usage count since 2013. RESULTS: The extracted articles were published between 1975-2019. Mean total citations ranged between 67 and 578. The most cited paper was: "Tofacitinib for the treatment of severe alopecia areata and variants: A study of 90 patients" by Liu et al. with an AC of 26.5. Most publications were published between 1990 and 1999 (n=28). The Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology was the most published journal (25 articles). The research focus of original papers was treatment (36%), epidemiology (22%), pathogenesis (20%), basic science (16%), and diagnosis (6%). CONCLUSION: This analysis is the first to provide detailed bibliometric characteristics, highlighting the worldwide burden and research trends in.

Analyzing collaboration and impact: A bibliometric review of four highly published authors' research profiles on collaborative maps.

The concept of impact beam plots (IBPs) has been introduced in academia as a means to profile individual researchers. Despite its potential, there has been a lack of comprehensive analysis that evaluates the research profiles of highly published authors through the lens of collaborative maps. This study introduces a novel approach, the rating scale for research profiles (RSRP), to create collaborative maps for prolific authors. The initial hypothesis posited that each of the research profiles would attain a grade A, necessitating empirical verification. This research employed collaborative maps to analyze the publication patterns of authors using the Web of Science database, focusing on co-authorship patterns and the impact of their scholarly work. The study relied on various bibliometric indicators, such as publication count, citation metrics, h-index, and co-authorship networks, to provide a detailed assessment of the contributions made by each author in their field. Additionally, authors' IBPs were generated and assessed alongside collaborative maps, using a grading scale ranging from A (excellent) to F (lacking any articles as first or corresponding author). The analysis confirmed that all 4 research profiles achieved a grade A, with their centroids located in the third quadrant, indicating a high level of scholarly impact. The h-indexes for the authors were found to be 38, 51, 53, and 59, respectively. Notably, Dr Tseng from Taiwan showed a distinct pattern, with a significant number of solo-authored publications in the second quadrant, in contrast to the other 3 authors who demonstrated a greater emphasis on collaboration, as evidenced by their positioning in the first quadrant. The study successfully demonstrates that RSRP and IBPs can be effectively used to analyze and profile the research output of highly published authors through collaborative maps. The research confirms the initial hypothesis that all 4 profiles would achieve a grade A, indicating an excellent level of scholarly impact and a strong presence in their respective fields. The utility of collaborative maps can be applied to bibliometric indicators in assessing the contributions and impact of scholars in the academic community.

NIH funding and journal selection: trends in dermatology publication models across tiers from 2021 to 2023.

This study examines the influence of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding on the publication choices of dermatologists, particularly in terms of journal tiers and pay-to-publish (P2P) versus free-to-publish (F2P) models. Utilizing k-means clustering for journal ranking based on SCImago Journal Rank, h-index, and Impact Factor, journals were categorized into three tiers and 54,530 dermatology publications from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Authors were classified as Top NIH Funded or Non-Top NIH Funded according to Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research rankings. The study finds significant differences in publication patterns, with Top NIH Funded researchers in Tier I journals demonstrating a balanced use of P2P and F2P models, while they preferred F2P models in Tier II and III journals. Non-Top NIH Funded authors, however, opted for P2P models more frequently across all tiers. These data suggest NIH funding allows researchers greater flexibility to publish in higher-tier journals despite publication fees, while prioritizing F2P models in lower-tier journals. Such a pattern indicates that funding status plays a critical role in strategic publication decisions, potentially impacting research visibility and subsequent funding. The study's dermatology focus limits broader applicability, warranting further research to explore additional factors like geographic location, author gender, and research design.

Skin color reporting in basal cell carcinoma-related randomized controlled trials in top dermatology journals: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate skin color is reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving basal cell carcinoma (BCC) identification and treatment in the top ten dermatology journals. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of RCTs involving BCC among the top ten dermatology journals, determined by impact factor, from inception to July 11th, 2023. Studies were included if they reviewed the prevention, detection, and treatment of BCC, directly involved patients, and were classified as RCTs. Studies were classified as positive for reporting skin of color (SOC) if the demographic data in the methods or results included any of the following terms: Fitzpatrick scale, race, ethnicity, skin of color, or sunburn tendency. RESULTS: Of the 51 studies identified, only 23 articles reported data pertaining to skin color within the results section (45.1%); whereas 28 articles mentioned skin color somewhere within the text (54.9%). Subgroup analysis was performed, and no statistical significance was found for study location or year of publication. CONCLUSION: Dark skin color can make it more difficult to diagnose skin tumors and it is unknown if race affects response to treatment. Less than 50% of RCTs related to basal cell carcinoma in top international dermatology journals included skin color within the demographic portion of their results section pertaining to study participants. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that studies performed within the United States reported skin color less than half the time (40%). Additionally, there has been no statistically significant difference in reporting over the past 4 decades. Further research is necessary to determine whether low reporting rates of race/skin color in BCC-related RCTS could impact diagnostic or treatment recommendations for patient care in this group.

[Analysis of highly cited papers in Chinese Journal of Epidemiology from 2020 to 2023].

Objective: To analyze the characteristics of highly-cited papers in Chinese Journal of Epidemiology from 2020 to 2023, and provide a basis for subsequent paper solicitation and identify research hotspots. Methods: On December 9, 2023, the citation frequency of each paper in Chinese Journal of Epidemiology from 2020 to 2023 was obtained from China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The total citation frequency of each paper was sorted using Excel 2016 software, and papers with citation frequency ≥30 were extracted for analysis. The keywords of the papers and Contents in Brief were analyzed. Results: A total of 1 317 papers were included in the analysis, of which 389, 342, 308 and 278 papers were included from 2020 to 2023. The total citation frequency was 11 873, and all papers were cited with an average citation frequency of 9. The keywords with high citation frequency in the papers included 2019-nCoV, hypertension, colorectal tumor, hand-foot-mouth disease, hepatitis B. and the average frequency of citation were 162, 77, 62, 51 and 47, respectively. There were 15 highly cited Contents in Brief in total, 11 of which are vital Contents in Brief or unique Contents in Brief, including Response to COVID-19 Epidemic, China Kadoorie Biobank, Epidemiological Research on Infectious Diseases, Healthy Ageing, Colorectal Cancer Prevention and Control, Prevention and Control of Hepatitis B, Quality Assessment of Cancer Screening Guidelines and Consensus, The 40th Anniversary of Chinese Journal of Epidemiology, Expert Forum, Review, Standard-Protocol-Guide. The total citation frequency was 3 951, accounting for 72.6% (3 951/5 438) of highly cited papers. Conclusions: In the past four years, the highly cited papers of this journal mainly focused on the research field of emerging infectious diseases and chronic diseases. The response to the 2019-nCoV epidemic highlights the academic leading role. The effect of selecting and planning a topic, commissioning authors to write on given topics and making an arrangement in advance with a subject for contribution to vital Contents in Brief or unique Contents in Brief of this journal is pronounced, and the academic influence of the journal continues to improve.

Bibliometric analysis of the top 100 highly cited articles on sublobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this research is to pinpoint the top 100 most frequently referenced studies on sublobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: We identified the top 100 most frequently referenced studies on sublobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer by searching the Web of Science database. We extracted key information from the selected studies, including the author, journal, impact factor, type of article, year of publication, country, organization, and keyword. RESULTS: To the best of our understanding, this is the inaugural bibliometric study on sublobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. The publication years of the top 100 most frequently referenced studies span from 1994 to 2022, with citation counts ranging from 51 to 795. The majority of the included studies are original (93/100) and primarily retrospective studies (82/93). The United States leads in terms of published articles and citations, with the Annals of Thoracic Surgery being the most frequently sourced journal (n = 27). High-density keywords primarily originate from limited resection, lobectomy, survival, carcinoma, recurrence, randomized trial, radiotherapy, lung cancer, outcome, 2 cm, as revealed by CiteSpace analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our research compiles and analyzes the top 100 most frequently referenced studies in the field of sublobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. The United States has the most published and cited works on this topic. Currently, the hot keywords for sublobectomy research are gradually shifting towards prognosis and obtaining better evidence-based medical evidence to demonstrate its value in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

A bibliometric analysis of the 100 top-cited systematic review and meta-analysis in Orthodontics.

OBJECTIVE: This bibliometric study aimed to analyze the citation metrics, journal and author characteristics, and subject domains of the 100 top-cited Systematic Reviews (SR) and Meta-Analysis (MA) in orthodontics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic database search was conducted for SR and MA in the Web of Science on 16th July 2023, without language and time restrictions. Of the 802 hits returned, the 100 top-cited orthodontic articles were shortlisted. They were analyzed for citation metrics, journal characteristics (journal, year of publication, impact factor-IF), author and affiliation characteristics (number, primary and corresponding author's affiliation, and country), study domain, and keywords. RESULTS: These articles were published from 1996 to 2021 in 20 journals, with an impact factor of 1.9 to 10.5, by 351 researchers affiliated with 104 universities. Their citations ranged from 45 to 344, and 34 poised to be classified as classic (≥ 100 citations). The maximum number of articles was published in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (n=38), the European Journal of Orthodontics (n=18), and the Angle Orthodontist (n=8). The authors for individual papers ranged from 1 to 10, with 5 being the most common (n=58). Europe had the highest contribution regarding the number of corresponding authors, institutions, and citations. Bone anchorage and orthodontic tooth movement/Biomechanics were the most frequently researched domains (n=11 each). The most common keyword used was Orthodontics (n=19), followed by Systematic Review (n=16) and Meta-analysis (n=9). CONCLUSION: In general, the top cited SR and MA were published in high-impact orthodontic journals, were multi-authored, and reflected the collaborative work from different universities.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Impact on Research Publications in Critical Care.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated a significant transformation of scientific journals. Our aim was to determine how critical care (CC) journals and their impact may have evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the impact, as measured by citations and publications, from the field of CC would increase. DESIGN: Observational study of journal publications, citations, and retractions status. SETTING: All work was done electronically and retrospectively. SUBJECTS: The top 18 CC journals broadly concerning CC, and the top 5 most productive CC journals on the SCImago list. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For the top 18 CC journals and specifically Critical Care Medicine (CCM), time series analysis was used to estimate the trends of total citations, citations per publication, and publications per year by using the best-fit curve. We used PubMed and Retraction Watch to determine the number of COVID-19 publications and retractions. The average total citations and citations per publication for all journals was an upward quadratic trend with inflection points in 2020, whereas publications per year spiked in 2020 before returning to prepandemic values in 2021. For CCM total publications trend downward while total citations and citations per publication generally trend up from 2017 onward. CCM had the lowest percentage of COVID-related publications (15.7%) during the pandemic and no reported retractions. Two COVID-19 retractions were noted in our top five journals. CONCLUSIONS: Citation activity across top CC journals underwent a dramatic increase during the COVID-19 pandemic without significant retraction data. These trends suggest that the impact of CC has grown significantly since the onset of COVID-19 while maintaining adherence to a high-quality peer-review process.

Impact of Open Access Policy on Brazilian Science and Global Trends.

Open access (OA) publishing provides free online access to research articles without subscription fees. In Brazil, absence of financial support from academic institutions and limited government policies pose challenges to OA publication. Here, we used data from the Web of Science and Scopus to compare with global trends in journal accessibility and scientific quality metrics. Brazilian authors publish more OA articles, particularly in Global South journals. While OA correlates with quality for global authors, it had no impact on Brazilian science. To maximize impact, Brazilian authors should prioritize Q1 journals regardless of OA status. High-impact or Global North journal publication seems more relevant for Brazilian science than OA. Our findings indicate that the present open access policy has been ineffective to improve the impact of Brazilian science, providing insights to guide the formulation of scientific public policies.

Assessing the impact of Canadian primary care research and researchers: Citation analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the citation impact and characteristics of Canadian primary care researchers and research publications. DESIGN: Citation analysis. SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 266 established Canadian primary care researchers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 50 most cited primary care researchers in Canada were identified by analyzing data from the Scopus database. Various parameters, including the number of publications and citations, research themes, Scopus h index, content analysis, journal impact factors, and field-weighted citation impact for their publications, were assessed. Information about the characteristics of these researchers was collected using the Google search engine. RESULTS: On average, the 50 most cited primary care researchers produced 51.1 first-author publications (range 13 to 249) and were cited 1864.32 times (range 796 to 9081) over 29 years. Twenty-seven publications were cited more than 500 times. More than half of the researchers were men (60%). Most were clinician scientists (86%) with a primary academic appointment in family medicine (86%) and were affiliated with 5 universities (74%). Career duration was moderately associated with the number of first-author publications (0.35; P=.013). Most research focused on family practice, while some addressed health and health care issues (eg, continuing professional education, pharmaceutical policy). CONCLUSION: Canada is home to a cadre of primary care researchers who are highly cited in the medical literature, suggesting that their work is of high quality and relevance. Building on this foundation, further investments in primary care research could accelerate needed improvements in Canadian primary care policy and practice.

Research interest on dental sealant in dentistry based on the 100 most cited articles: bibliometric analysis.

The aim of this study was to identify and analyze the characteristics of the 100 most cited articles about dental sealants (DS) in dentistry. In September 2023, a search was performed in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS-CC) database. The following information was extracted from each article: number and density of citations, year of publication, authorship, journal, impact factor, keywords, study design, theme, continent, country, and institution. The citations of the WoS-CC were compared with those of the Scopus and Google Scholar databases. The VOSviewer software was used to generate collaborative networks. The number of citations ranged from 33 to 205. The articles were published between 1961 and 2016. Buonocore MG (7%) was the most prominent author among the most cited. The Journal of the American Dental Association was the most frequent journal (25%) and Journal of Dental Research (7.6) had the highest impact factor. Most studies had interventional (41%) and laboratory (31%) designs, mainly addressing DS effectiveness in the prevention and control of dental caries (86%). There was a predominance of publications from North America (46%) and the USA was the country with the highest number of articles (44%). The most frequent institutions were the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) and the University of Rochester (USA) (6% each). "Retention" was the most frequent keyword. In conclusion, the 100 most cited articles were mostly interventional and laboratory studies, addressing the retention and efficacy of DS. Most of the articles were concentrated in North America and Europe, demonstrating a little collaboration from other continents.