The 100 most influential articles in myopia: a bibliometric analysis

8Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

AIM: To identify and characterize the 100 most influential articles in the field of myopia over the last decades. METHODS: Articles on myopia published between January 1975 and March 2020 were searched through the Web of Science Core Collection database. Two independent authors reviewed and determined the 100 most cited articles. The characteristics of each eligible article were recorded, including authors, institutions, countries, journals, publication date, total citations (TCs), annual citations (ACs), research focus and article type. RESULTS: The top 100 most influential articles were published between 1983 and 2016, with 1999 as the most prolific year. The mean number of TCs was 288 (range: 193-537) and the mean number of ACs was 19 (range: 7-109). Treatment and epidemiology of myopia were the most important research focus. These articles were published in 21 journals led by Ophthalmology (29%) followed by Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (23%). The number of ACs for articles published in the last ten years was significantly higher than that for the other most-cited articles (44 vs 16, Mann-Whitney U test P<0.01). There is no difference in the number of TCs between original articles and review articles, while the number of ACs for review articles was significantly higher than that for original articles (22 vs 17, Mann-Whitney U test P<0.05). CONCLUSION: This bibliometric analysis can provide us with concise information about the development trend of research in the field of myopia in the past few decades, and provide an important reference for researchers to guide future research.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wang, X. J., Chen, D., Jiang, Y., Chou, Y. Y., Luo, Y., Li, Y., … Zhong, Y. (2022). The 100 most influential articles in myopia: a bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Ophthalmology, 15(1), 150–156. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2022.01.22

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free