The most cited articles inIndoor Air, through 18 years

Abstract

Indoor Air started in the year 1991; we will soon turn 20 years. We have published more than 700 articles (and have rejected more than 1300 submissions). It is impossible to rank the best or most important articles, but we do have information about which articles have been the most cited. From 1994 Indoor Air has full citation coverage through ISI’s Web of Knowledge. The ten most cited articles published since 1994 are these (with citation statistics through 18 February 2009): Cited 196 times. Dampness in buildings and health – Nordic interdisciplinary review of the scientific evidence on associations between exposure to ‘dampness’ in buildings and health effects (NORDDAMP). Bornehag CG, Blomquist G, Gyntelberg F, et al. 2001: 11(2), 72–86. Cited 164 times. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds in indoor air – a review. Brown SK, Sim MR, Abramson MJ, et al. 1994: 4(2), 123–134. Cited 103 times. Ozone in indoor environments: concentration and chemistry. Weschler CJ. 2000: 10(4), 269–288. Cited 96 times. The effects of outdoor air supply rate in an office on perceived air quality, sick building syndrome (SBS) symptoms and productivity. Wargocki P, Wyon D, Sundell J, et al. 2000: 10(4), 222–236. Cited 94 times. Perceived air quality, sick building syndrome (SBS) symptoms and productivity in an office with two different pollution loads. Wargocki P, Wyon D, Baik YK, et al. 1999: 9(3), 165–179. Cited 84 times. Dust and the sick building syndrome. Gyntelberg F, Suadicani P, Nielsen JW, et al. 1994: 4(4), 223–238. Cited 80 times. Impact of temperature and humidity on the perception of indoor air quality. Fang L, Clausen G, Fanger PO. 1998: 8(2), 80–90. Cited 79 times. Estimates of improved productivity and health from better indoor environments. Fisk WJ, Rosenfeld AH. 1997: 7(3), 158–172. Cited 78 times. Association of ventilation rates and CO2 concentrations with health and other responses in commercial and institutional buildings. Seppanen OA, Fisk WJ, Mendell MJ. 1999: 9(4), 226–252. Cited 73 times. Indoor air quality, ventilation and health symptoms in schools: an analysis of existing information. Daisey JM, Angell WJ, Apte MG. 2003: 13(4), 53–64. For articles published in the first three volumes of Indoor Air, there is citation information in Google Scholar. This source also counts some citations in reports and other non-peer reviewed publications. The most cited articles from 1991 to 1993 are these: Cited 160 times (Google). Non-specific symptoms in office workers: a review and summary of the epidemiologic literature. Mendell MJ. 1993: 3(4), 227–236. Cited 124 times (Google). Volatile organic compounds, indoor air quality and health. Mølhave L. 1991: 1(4), 357–376. Cited 86 times (Google). The interaction of vapour phase organic compounds with indoor sinks. Tichenor BA, Guo Z, Dunn JE, et al. 1991: 1(1) 23–35. Combining these citation sources and allowing for intercomparison uncertainty, a possibly correct top ten list of the most cited articles published in Indoor Air to date would be these: Bornehag et al., 2001; Brown et al., 1994; Mendell, 1993; Mølhave, 1991; Weschler, 2000; Wargocki et al., 2000; Wargocki et al., 1999; Gyntelberg et al., 1994; Fang et al., 1998; Fisk and Rosenfeld, 1997. A large majority of these articles are reviews that address both exposures and health. All except Brown et al. (1994, Australia) are from Nordic countries or the USA. The median age of articles in the list is about a decade. This long age reflects that it takes time to be cited; the geographic concentration indicates that, early on, science within this field was mainly conducted in the Nordic countries and the USA. However, this situation is changing. If we look at the 100 most cited articles since 1994 (each of which has been cited more than 20 times), the most common publication year on this list is 2002 (11 articles of the top 100), and more than 50% of the top 100 were published in 2000 or later. We also see the emergence of influential research from eastern Asia in this longer list, a trend we expect to continue. The focus on reviews also reflects that few large multidisciplinary studies have been conducted. A consequence is that there is a need to conduct reviews or meta-analyses to gather enough important data with which to gain robust insights into the complex relationships between indoor environmental quality and health. In today’s economic climate, the possibility to conduct larger studies is limited (IAQ and health is still not adequately recognized as an important research area in this world). A solution may be more collaboration among institutions, each bringing their own (too small) funding together to support larger projects. But hopefully the broader situation will change, so that the general public and (then) the politicians will gain a greater (and proper) understanding of the importance of our research field.