Top 100 cited Articles in Charcot Neuroarthropathy

Abstract

Background and aimsAn article's scientific impact has often been measured by the number of citations it receives, and a citation analysis can help determine impactful works in medical specialties. The objective of this study is to describe the metrics and levels of evidence of articles in Charcot neuroarthropathy. MethodsThis study reviewed the top 100 most cited articles available when searching for articles in electronic database using the keywords “Charcot neuroarthropathy.” Each article was examined for the number of citations, publication type, journal specialty, authorship, country of origin, year of publication, level of evidence, and total sample size. ResultsThe number of citations ranged from 20 to 490. The 100 most cited articles were published in 48 journals, spanning from general to more specific subspecialty journals. 19% of articles were published by the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery. The most common level of evidence was V (42 out of 100 articles), and most articles were literature reviews (n = 42) and case series (n = 27). The median sample size in experimental studies was 29. Out of 100 articles, only 5 were randomized controlled trials. ConclusionsThe median year of most cited publications, 2008, suggests a need for newer studies reviewing Charcot neuroarthropathy. The paucity of articles with an evidence level of 1 or 2 along with small median sample size suggests a lack of scientifically rigorous studies reviewing Charcot neuropathy. Identification of most cited papers about Charcot neuroarthropathy gives clinicians insight into the general scientific review of the disorder. Level of clinical evidenceN/A