Abstract
ObjectiveTo determine if the quality of otolaryngology‐related journal articles correlates with traditional measures of article impact.MethodsAll articles published by Laryngoscope in 2011 were categorized according to level of evidence (LOE) according to the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine rubric. Articles without a level of evidence assigned were alphabetically subcategorized type with letters A‐D corresponding to Contemporary Reports, Case Reports, Basic Science or Animal Studies, and Other respectively. Citations per article were then recorded per article each year from 2012 to 2018.ResultsA total of 494 articles were included for analysis, 315 had numerical LOE and 179 had alphabetical LOE. There was a strong negative correlation between numerical LOE and median and interquartile number of citations (R = −.9014, P = .037). Overall, numerical LOE had a significantly higher median number of citations per article compared with the non‐number/alphabetical group (14 vs 6, P < .001).ConclusionsHigher quality research as determined by level of evidence is in fact being cited more frequently than lower quality articles. Although the scope of this study was relatively limited, these data suggest that better designed studies may exhibit greater impact by traditional measures. Such findings should serve as an impetus for (and validation of) continued pursuit of high LOE research.Level of EvidenceNA.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
