4.3 Review

Shaping Our Understanding of Medulloblastoma: A Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most Cited Articles

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
Volume 194, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105895

Keywords

medulloblastoma; bibliometric; most cited; impactful; basic science; clinical; sonic hedgehog

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The clinical management of medulloblastoma has undergone significant transformation since the recent dawn of the molecular era. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate citation and other bibliometric characteristics of the 100 most cited medulloblastoma articles in the literature to better understand the current state of our research efforts into this diagnosis. Elsevier's Scopus database was searched for the 100 most cited articles that focused on medulloblastoma. Articles were dichotomized as either primarily basic science (BSc) or clinical (CL) articles. Various bibliometric parameters were summarized and compared between BSc and CL articles using Pearson's Chi-square and Mann Whitney U tests. Of the 100 most cited articles, 52 were characterized as BSc articles and 48 as CL articles. Overall median (range) values were as follows: citation count 252 (164-1,270); citation rate per year 17.5 (2.5-110); number of authors 11 (1-135); and publication year 2005 (1925-2014). Articles were published in a total of 40 different journals, and the majority originated in the US (n = 60). When compared to CL articles, BSc articles reported significantly greater citation rates per year (P < 0.01), and more recent years of publication (P < 0.01). In summary, although similar in overall proportion, BSc articles demonstrated significantly increased bibliometric parameters of impact in this field by the successful clustering molecular subtypes. Moving forward, it will be of great interest to see how the findings from these impactful BSc articles will translate into future clinical initiatives and subsequently high-impact CL articles.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available