Abstract
Citation analysis is a bibliometric method that uses citation rates to evaluate research performance. This type of analysis can identify the articles that have shaped the modern history of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN). To identify and characterize top-cited OBGYN articles in the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science's Science Citation Index Expanded and to compare top-cited OBGYN articles published in specialty OBGYN journals with those published in nonspecialty journals. Cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of top-cited articles that were indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded from 1980 to 2018. The Science Citation Index Expanded was queried using search terms from the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology's 2018 certifying examination topics list. The top 100 articles from all journals and the top 100 articles from OBGYN journals were evaluated for specific characteristics. Data were analyzed in March 2019. The articles were characterized by citation number, publication year, topic, study design, and authorship. After excluding articles that featured on both lists, top-cited articles were compared. The query identified 3 767 874 articles, of which 278 846 (7.4%) were published in OBGYN journals. The top-cited article was published by Rossouw and colleagues in JAMA (2002). Top-cited articles published in nonspecialty journals were more frequently cited than those in OBGYN journals (median [interquartile range], 1738 [1490-2077] citations vs 666 [580-843] citations, respectively; P < .001) and were more likely to be randomized trials (25.0% vs 2.2%, respectively; difference, 22.8%; 95% CI, 13.5%-32.2%; P < .001). Whereas articles from nonspecialty journals focused on broad topics like osteoporosis, articles from OBGYN journal focused on topics like preeclampsia and endometriosis. This study found substantial differences between top-cited OBGYN articles published in nonspecialty vs OBGYN journals. These differences may reflect the different goals of the journals, which work together to ensure optimal dissemination of impactful articles.
Highlights
Evaluative bibliometrics is a field of quantitative science that uses methods like citation analysis to evaluate research performance.[1]
Top-cited articles published in nonspecialty journals were more frequently cited than those in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) journals and were more likely to be randomized trials (25.0% vs 2.2%, respectively; difference, 22.8%; 95% CI, 13.5%-32.2%; P < .001)
Whereas articles from nonspecialty journals focused on broad topics like osteoporosis, articles from OBGYN journal focused on topics like preeclampsia and endometriosis
Summary
Evaluative bibliometrics is a field of quantitative science that uses methods like citation analysis to evaluate research performance.[1]. Academic success is largely predicated on the productive authorship of highly cited articles,[2,3] and a bibliometric analysis can serve to identify influential articles that have shaped medical practice and fostered new research ideas. The term citation classics was introduced in 1955 by Eugene Garfield, PhD, to identify top-cited scientific articles in the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Knowledge ( known as the Web of Science) databases.[4] His intent was to capture the “human side of science” and include “personal details that are rarely found in formal academic publication, such as obstacles encountered and byways taken.”[4] The ISI Web of Science has grown substantially since Dr Garfield’s day. An article that is cited more than 100 times is considered a citation classic, higher cutoffs (eg, >400 citations) have been used in larger fields.[4]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
