Abstract
Background:Breast cancer has a rich history of research over the past 75 years. Many studies have had disruptive influences on the field itself. Our study employs a new, validated measurement to determine the most disruptive publications within the field of breast cancer. Materials and Methods:PubMed® database was queried for articles between 1954-2014 related to breast cancer with in 21 different journals deemed important to the field. Articles were then scored for disruption and citation count. The top 100 most disruptive and cited publications were compiled and analyzed. Results:Disruption score was a distinct measurement from citation count and had low level of correlation. Disruptive publications tended to skew older with the median year of publication in 1977. The score identified a variety of study designs and publication types within multiple journals. Conclusions:Measurement of the disruptive quality of a publication is a new way to describe academic impact of a publication and is distinct from citation count. Used in conjunction with citation count in may give a more descriptive bibliometric assessment of the literature. Further exploration within the field of oncology is warranted.
Highlights
Bibliometrics are used to analyze academic productivity and the impact of scientific publications(Borgman and Furner, 2005)
The 100 most disruptive publications and 100 most cited papers in breast cancer care as determined in this study are listed in Table 1 and supplementary Table 2
The average breast cancer paper had a disruption score of -0.00115 while the entire PubMed universe had an average of -0.00055; the top 100 most disruptive breast cancer papers were more disruptive than 99.9% of the Pubmed universe
Summary
Bibliometrics are used to analyze academic productivity and the impact of scientific publications(Borgman and Furner, 2005). The number of times an individual paper has been cited, known as the “citation count” has been the predominant metric for assessing the importance or utility of a publication to its field of study. This method has come under scrutiny for not fully describing the importance of some contributions to the areas of scientific exploration. Our study employs a new, validated measurement to determine the most disruptive publications within the field of breast cancer. Conclusions: Measurement of the disruptive quality of a publication is a new way to describe academic impact of a publication and is distinct from citation count.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
