The 100 Most Cited vs. Most Relevant Articles in the Journal of Neurosurgery: A Bibliometric Analysis.

Abstract

IntroductionThe Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS) published its first volume in 1944 and has evolved into the top cited journal in the field of neurosurgery. The aim of this study was to determine and characterize the 100 most cited (based on the total number of citations) vs. most relevant (based on the number of citations per year) articles originating in JNS.MethodsThe top 100 most cited articles in JNS were determined by searching the Web of Science database. Citations per year were additionally calculated for the top 1000 articles by total citations to rank the 100 most relevant articles.ResultsThe median number of total citations for the 100 most cited articles in JNS was 505 (range 383-2200), and the median number of citations per year for the 100 most relevant articles was 21.88 (range 17.31-82.61). The median year of publication for the 100 most cited and most relevant articles was 1990 and 1999, respectively (P < 0.0001). Most articles originated in the United States in both categories (72% and 71%, respectively). The most common topic of study was cerebrovascular on both lists, followed by trauma on the most cited list vs. tumor on the most relevant list. The most relevant list also contained considerably more articles with a higher level of evidence such as systemic reviews/meta-analyses and prospective studies.ConclusionsThis study highlights the key contributing factors to the growth and flourishing of JNS. It also reveals several discrepancies between the most cited and most relevant articles, with the latter including more recently published articles, more studies addressing tumor, and more level I/1 (NHMRC/CEBM) evidence. Bibliometric analysis serves as a useful tool for clinicians and researchers to appraise published literature and understand the scientific foundation of modern neurosurgery.