Short Communication

*Author for correspondence: Tel.: +1 979 307 8495;

Department of Internal Medicine, Piedmont Athens Regional Medical Center, Athens, GA 30606, USA

Department of Environmental & Occupational Health, School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:23 Jun 2022https://doi.org/10.2217/fca-2022-0011

View article

Abstract

Aim: We evaluated the characteristics of the top 50 most cited articles on cardiac tumors using bibliometric analysis. Method: Independent reviewers queried the Web of Science database for articles within the past 50 years. Results: Most articles were published between 1991 and 2016, 18% (9/50) of the first authors were women, 52% (26/50) of the articles were focused on cardiac imaging in addition to other aspects of cardiac tumors and only 61.5% (16/26) of these were focused purely on cardiac imaging. A journal’s impact factor and the number of citations of an article were positively correlated, r(48) = 0.24, p = 0.048. Conclusion: This study presents insight into the top 50 most cited articles on cardiac tumors and provides guidance for future research.

Plain language summary

We assessed the authorship characteristics, types of articles, and the relationship between the citation counts of the articles, and the academic importance of the journal in which the top 50 articles were published. Two authors searched separately an online database for the top 50 articles published. The top 50 articles were published between 1991 and 2016, two in five first authors were women, most of the articles were on cardiac imaging, and an article was more likely to be cited if it was published in a journal with a high academic importance. This study shows us that few women are authors in this academic area and researchers should explore other aspects of cardiac tumors.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1. Yu K, Liu Y, Wang H, Hu S, Long C. Epidemiological and pathological characteristics of cardiac tumors: a clinical study of 242 cases. Interactive Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 6(5) 636–639 (2007). • A retrospective study with more234 patients revealed a prevalence of 0.71% among cardiac population.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Hoffmeier A, Sindermann JR, Scheld HH, Martens S. Cardiac tumors. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 111(12), 205–211 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Maleszewski JJ, Anavekar NS, Moynihan TJ, Klarich KW. Pathology, imaging, and treatment of cardiac tumours. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 14(9), 536–549 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
4. Yu K, Liu Y, Wang H, Hu S, Long C. Epidemiological and pathological characteristics of cardiac tumors: a clinical study of 242 cases. Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg. 6(5), 636–639 (2007). • This retrospective study of 242 cases reports the lower prevalence of malignant cardiac tumors as compared to benign tumors.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5. Tyebally S, Chen D, Bhattacharyya S et al. Cardiac Tumors. JACC CardioOncol. 2(2), 293–311 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6. Rahouma M, Arisha MJ, Elmously A et al. Cardiac tumors prevalence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Surg. 76, 178–189 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
7. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D et al. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 133, 285–296 (2021). •• This paper describes how to conduct a bibliometric analysis.
Google Scholar
8. The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z
Google Scholar
9. Ugolini D, Puntoni R, Perera FP et al. A bibliometric analysis of scientific production in cancer molecular epidemiology. Carcinogenesis 28(8), 1774–1779 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Powell AGMT, Hughes DL, Wheat JR, Lewis WG. The 100 most influential manuscripts in gastric cancer: a bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Surg. 28, 83–90 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
11. Azer SA, Azer S. Bibliometric analysis of the top-cited gastroenterology and hepatology articles. BMJ Open 6(2), e009889 (2016). •• A paper that reports the underrepresentation of female authors and the lack of a correlation between number of years since publication and number of citations.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12. Liao J, Wang J, Liu Y et al. The most cited articles in coronary heart disease: a bibliometric analysis between 1970 and 2015. Int. J. Cardiol. 222, 1049–1052 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13. Shuaib W, Khan MS, Shahid H et al. Bibliometric analysis of the top 100 cited cardiovascular articles. Am. J. Cardiol. 115(7), 972–981 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Rickard M, Hannick JH, Fernandez N et al. Publication trends in pediatric renal transplantation: bibliometric analysis of literature from 1950 to 2017. Pediatr. Transplant. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/petr.13455?casa_token=QdW0fq7s6lwAAAAA:7aavdF98_d6wDSySPwkkPA6CyfE3zPIKI7PCsv5WL2kLg7zXjtLFelLdsbEWVoJlM4K5nO2HqK7Mibk
Google Scholar
15. Cañas-Guerrero I, Mazarrón FR, Pou-Merina A et al. Bibliometric analysis of research activity in the ‘agronomy’ category from the Web of Science, 1997–2011. Eur. J. Agron. 50, 19–28 (2013).
Google Scholar
16. A decade bibliometric analysis of global research on leishmaniasis in Web of Science database. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2049080118300050
Google Scholar
17. Lim KJ, Yoon DY, Yun EJ et al. Characteristics and trends of radiology research: a survey of original articles published in AJR and Radiology between 2001 and 2010. Radiology 264(3), 796–802 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
18. Mügge A, Daniel WG, Haverich A, Lichtlen PR. Diagnosis of noninfective cardiac mass lesions by two-dimensional echocardiography. Comparison of the transthoracic and transesophageal approaches. Circulation 83(1). www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/01.CIR.83.1.70
Google Scholar
19. Meng Q, Lai H, Lima J et al. Echocardiographic and pathologic characteristics of primary cardiac tumors: a study of 149 cases. Int. J. Cardiol. 84(1), 69–75 (2002). • A retrospective study that describes the imaging characteristics of cardiac tumors.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
20. Luna A, Ribes R, Caro P et al. Evaluation of cardiac tumors with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur. Radiol. 15(7), 1446–1455 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
21. O'Sullivan KE, Kelly JC, Hurley JP. The 100 most cited publications in cardiac surgery: a bibliometric analysis. Ir. J. Med. Sci. 184(1), 91–99 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
22. Kolkailah AA, Fugar S, Vondee N et al. Bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most cited articles in the first 50 years of heart transplantation. Am. J. Cardiol. 123(1), 175–186 (2019). • A bibliometric analysis which found no correlation between journal impact factor and number of citations.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
23. Li S. Surgical experience of primary cardiac tumor: single-institution 23-year report. Med. Sci. Monit. 23, 2111–2117 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
24. Ozsoy Z, Demir E. The evolution of bariatric surgery publications and global productivity: a bibliometric analysis. Obes. Surg. 28(4), 1117–1129 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
25. Kelly JC, Glynn RW, O’Briain DE et al. The 100 classic papers of orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 92-B(10), 1338–1343 (2010).
Google Scholar
26. Shahid I, Motiani V, Siddiqi TJ et al. Characteristics of highly cited articles in heart failure: a bibliometric analysis. Future Cardiol. 16(3), 189–197 (2020). • This bibliometric study reports the underrepresentation of female first authors in heart failure studies.
CASGoogle Scholar
27. Wininger AE, Fischer JP, Likine EF et al. Bibliometric analysis of female authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over JBMR‘s 30-year history: authorship trends in JBMR. J. Bone Miner. Res. 32(12), 2405–2414 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
28. Luc JGY, Vervoort D, Percy E et al. Trends in female authorship: a bibliometric analysis of the annals of thoracic surgery. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 111(4), 1387–1393 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Shahid I, Motiani V, Siddiqi TJ et al. Characteristics of highly cited articles in heart failure: a bibliometric analysis. Future Cardiol. 16(3), 189–197 (2020).
CASGoogle Scholar
30. Zhou Y, Zhu XP, Shi JJ et al. Coronary heart disease and depression or anxiety: a bibliometric analysis. Front. Psychol. 12, 669000 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31. Zhang X, Estoque RC, Xie H et al. Bibliometric analysis of highly cited articles on ecosystem services. PLoS One 14(2), e0210707 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Ahmad P, Slots J. A bibliometric analysis of periodontology. Periodontol. 2000 85(1), 237–240 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
33. Chadegani AA, Salehi H, Yunus M et al. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Social Sci. 9(5) 18–26. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2257540 •• This paper compares the output of online search engines such as the Web of Science and Scopus.
Google Scholar

Vol. 18, No. 7

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 25 times

History

Received 1 February 2022

Accepted 5 May 2022

Published online 23 June 2022

Published in print July 2022

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/fca-2022-0011

Author contributions

Both authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by O Kesiena and T Olokunlade. The first draft of the manuscript was written by O Kesiena, and both authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download

The top 50 most cited articles on cardiac tumors: a bibliometric analysis

Abstract

Plain language summary

References