How accurate are citations of frequently cited papers in biomedical literature?

Recent applications and prospects of omega-3 fatty acids: A bibliometric study and visualization analysis in 2014-2023

Omega-3 fatty acids are indispensable and crucial nutrients that are pivotal in promoting cardiovascular well-being, enhancing cognitive function, and regulating the body's inflammatory response. This study employed bibliometric analysis to investigate the progression of omega-3 fatty acids research. We used the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) to find articles about omega-3 fatty acids published from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2023. The bibliometric analysis and visualization were conducted using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. This analysis contained a total of 18,764 articles that were focused on omega-3 fatty acids. Among these articles, the nations with the highest number of publications were the United States, China, and Spain. The United States held the greatest influence. The journal Nutrients had the most publications related to this search. Upon analyzing the highly referenced literature, we discovered there is ongoing debate on the potential benefits of Omega-3 fatty acids for illnesses. Moreover, the time-overlapping network analysis of keywords finds investigating the impact of omega-3 fatty acids dietary supplementation on gut microbiota is a promising area of future research. Ultimately, bibliometrics could help researchers comprehend the trajectory of development, noticeable topics, and scholarly impact within omega-3 fatty acids linked domains, thereby offering substantial backing for future investigations of greater depth.

Drivers of citations in social pharmacy and practice research articles

BACKGROUND

Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy has been expanding in the last decade. The recently published Granada Statements offer key recommendations to improve the quality of research in this field.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the factors associated with the citations of articles in the field of social, administrative, clinical pharmacy and practice research.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective, observational analysis of articles published in three leading journals. Per article Google Scholar citations was the dependent variable. Predictor variables were extracted from all articles published from 2013 to 2015. The dependent variable was dichotomized using sample's median Google Scholar citations. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of citations ≥ median.

RESULTS

The median number of citations per article was 17 (range 0-341), with a mean of 24.2 (SD 27.6). The number of references included in the articles (OR 1.03, CI 1.02-1.04), the year of publication (OR 0.31 CI 0.21-0.46 for articles published 2015), article social media mentions (OR = 1.01, CI 1.01-1.03 and OR 1.10 CI 1.04-1.18 for Facebook and X, respectively), the topic area of research namely pharmacy services (OR 1.65, CI 1.06-2.57) and medication adherence (OR 2.22 CI 1.13-4.33) were independently associated with article having citations ≥ median.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of references, the year of publication, social media mentions and the topic area of research, namely pharmacy services and medication adherence, were associated with citations above median in the leading journals of social and administrative pharmacy research. Authors may consider providing a thorough literature review in their articles, while researchers, editors, and publishers are advised to use social media to promote newly published work. This article complements the Granada Statements and may contribute to fostering wider dissemination of the discipline's outputs.

Turning good intentions into good outcomes: ethical dilemmas at a student-run clinic and a rubric for reflective action

Student-run clinics represent a unique medical education and healthcare delivery model powered largely by good intentions. These good intentions may produce questionable results, however, when juxtaposed with intense academic pressure to fill one's curriculum vitae with personal achievements, leadership roles and peer-reviewed publications. It becomes a legitimate ethical question whether student-run clinics consistently and materially enrich the care of underserved communities, or merely inspire a litany of rushed, short-term and low-quality projects that sidestep patient welfare or even cause brazen harm. As co-directors of HOMES Clinic, a student-managed clinic which offers free health and social services to people experiencing housing insecurity, we routinely encounter such well-intentioned but ethically questionable proposals. Here, we present four short case studies that dissect apart some of these common yet suspect assumptions underpinning student-run clinics. We then conclude with a rubric for reflective, calibrated action.

Inaccuracy of idiopathic intracranial hypertension diagnosis in case reports

BACKGROUND

We reviewed the medical case report literature to determine the proportion of cases of idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) that were either inappropriately labelled as IIH or prematurely given this diagnosis.

METHODS

We searched OVID MEDLINE from 2012 to 2022 to identify case reports that diagnosed patients with IIH. Case reports were assessed for diagnostic accuracy using Friedman et al.'s revised diagnostic criteria for primary pseudotumor cerebri syndrome. Our primary outcome was the crude prevalence of inappropriate or premature IIH diagnoses. Our secondary outcome was determining if inaccurate IIH diagnoses were associated with variables such as journal subscription model and impact factor, author affiliation, country of origin, and year of publication.

RESULTS

A total of 33/185 case reports (17.8%) either incorrectly labelled a patient as having IIH or did not perform all of the investigations necessary to make a diagnosis of IIH. Some of these studies (4.8%) were believed to still represent 'probable' IIH given the clinical presentation, whereas 13.0% of studies were determined to have mislabelled their patients as having IIH. The most common reason that case reports did not meet diagnostic criteria included: a lack of MRV in atypical patient cases (42.4%, n = 14), no papilledema in addition to a lack of characteristic neuroimaging features (33.3%, n = 11), intracranial hypertension being secondary to another documented cause (12.1%, n = 4), normal LP opening pressure in addition to other factors (12.1%,n = 4), no description of neuroimaging (6.1%, n = 2), and abnormal CSF composition (6.1%, n = 2). Case reports that used the term 'IIH' incorrectly had a significantly lower journal impact factor (2.0 vs. 2.6, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high prevalence of premature or inappropriate diagnoses of IIH in the peer-reviewed case report literature. Adherence to published diagnostic criteria is needed when publishing IIH case reports, and authors are expected to report all relevant data in their report to ensure that an accurate diagnosis is made.

Reporting quality of abstracts and inconsistencies with full text articles in pediatric orthopedic publications

BACKGROUND

Abstracts should provide a brief yet comprehensive reporting of all components of a manuscript. Inaccurate reporting may mislead readers and impact citation practices. It was our goal to investigate the reporting quality of abstracts of interventional observational studies in three major pediatric orthopedic journals and to analyze any reporting inconsistencies between those abstracts and their corresponding full-text articles.

METHODS

We selected a sample of 55 abstracts and their full-text articles published between 2018 and 2022. Included articles were primary therapeutic research investigating the results of treatments or interventions. Abstracts were scrutinized for reporting quality and inconsistencies with their full-text versions with a 22-itemized checklist. The reporting quality of titles was assessed by a 3-items categorical scale.

RESULTS

In 48 (87%) of articles there were abstract reporting inaccuracies related to patient demographics. The study's follow-up and complications were not reported in 21 (38%) of abstracts each. Most common inconsistencies between the abstracts and full-text articles were related to reporting of inclusion or exclusion criteria in 39 (71%) and study correlations in 27 (49%) of articles. Reporting quality of the titles was insufficient in 33 (60%) of articles.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study we found low reporting quality of abstracts and noticeable inconsistencies with full-text articles, especially regarding inclusion or exclusion criteria and study correlations. While the current sample is likely not representative of overall pediatric orthopedic literature, we recommend that authors, reviewers, and editors ensure abstracts are reported accurately, ideally following the appropriate reporting guidelines, and that they double check that there are no inconsistencies between abstracts and full text articles. To capture essential study information, journals should also consider increasing abstract word limits.

The evolution of scientific literature as metastable knowledge states

The problem of identifying common concepts in the sciences and deciding when new ideas have emerged is an open one. Metascience researchers have sought to formalize principles underlying stages in the life cycle of scientific research, understand how knowledge is transferred between scientists and stakeholders, and explain how new ideas are generated and take hold. Here, we model the state of scientific knowledge immediately preceding new directions of research as a metastable state and the creation of new concepts as combinatorial innovation. Through a novel approach combining natural language clustering and citation graph analysis, we predict the evolution of ideas over time and thus connect a single scientific article to past and future concepts in a way that goes beyond traditional citation and reference connections.

Quotation errors related to the wound management of open lower limb fractures (WOLLF) randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

We assessed the accuracy of quotations in the published literature of the Wound Management of Open Lower Limb Fractures (WOLLF) Randomized Clinical Trial.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify all citations of WOLLF from 2018 to 2021. Duplicate papers, non-English language papers, textbooks, technical tip videos, Ph.D. theses, and other grey literature were excluded from analysis. Eligible publications had their full text assessed by 2 independent reviewers who used a validated framework of error classification.

RESULTS

We identified 62 original papers that met our eligibility criteria and referenced WOLLF. Of the 62 papers, 12 contained a quotation error (12/62, 19%). Errors were classified into major and minor. There were 7 major errors and 5 minor errors. The majority of quotation errors (7/12, 58%) occurred due to multi-referencing, where groups of references were used to support single assertions. There was substantial agreement between the two independent reviewers as determined by a Kappa coefficient of 0.761.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated a 19% quotation error rate in the literature regarding WOLLF. The majority were due to multi-referencing. We suggest that both authors and reviewers carefully check the source literature of key references.

Inappropriate Citation of Retracted Articles in Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine Publications

BACKGROUND

Retracted articles represent research withdrawn from the existing body of literature after publication. Research articles may be retracted for several reasons ranging from honest errors to intentional misconduct. They should not be used as reliable sources, and it is unclear why they are cited occasionally by other articles. This study hypothesized that several mechanisms may contribute to citing retracted literature and aimed to analyze the characteristics of articles citing retracted literature in anesthesiology and critical care.

METHODS

Using the Retraction Watch database, we retrieved retracted articles on anesthesiology and intensive care medicine up to August 16, 2021 and identified the manuscripts citing these retracted articles. A survey designed to investigate the reasons for citing these articles was sent to the corresponding authors of the citing manuscripts.

RESULTS

We identified 478 retracted articles, 220 (46%) of which were cited at least once. We contacted 1297 corresponding authors of the studies that cited these articles, 417 (32%) of whom responded to our survey and were included in the final analysis. The median number of authors in the analyzed articles was five, and the median elapsed time from retraction to citation was 3 years. Most of the corresponding authors (372, 89%) were unaware of the retracted status of the cited article, mainly because of inadequate notification of the retraction status in journals and/or databases and the use of stored copies.

CONCLUSIONS

The corresponding authors were generally unaware of the retraction of the cited article, usually because of inadequate identification of the retracted status in journals and/or web databases and the use of stored copies. Awareness of this phenomenon and rigorous control of the cited references before submitting a paper are of fundamental importance in research.

Is the future of peer review automated?

The rising rate of preprints and publications, combined with persistent inadequate reporting practices and problems with study design and execution, have strained the traditional peer review system. Automated screening tools could potentially enhance peer review by helping authors, journal editors, and reviewers to identify beneficial practices and common problems in preprints or submitted manuscripts. Tools can screen many papers quickly, and may be particularly helpful in assessing compliance with journal policies and with straightforward items in reporting guidelines. However, existing tools cannot understand or interpret the paper in the context of the scientific literature. Tools cannot yet determine whether the methods used are suitable to answer the research question, or whether the data support the authors' conclusions. Editors and peer reviewers are essential for assessing journal fit and the overall quality of a paper, including the experimental design, the soundness of the study's conclusions, potential impact and innovation. Automated screening tools cannot replace peer review, but may aid authors, reviewers, and editors in improving scientific papers. Strategies for responsible use of automated tools in peer review may include setting performance criteria for tools, transparently reporting tool performance and use, and training users to interpret reports.

Evaluation of Citation Inaccuracies in Surgical Literature by Journal Type, Study Design, and Level of Evidence: Towards Safeguarding the Peer-Review Process

BACKGROUND

Accurate citation practices are key to furthering knowledge in an efficient and valid manner. The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of citation inaccuracies in original research from the top-ranked surgical journals and to evaluate the impact level of evidence has on citation inaccuracy.

METHODS

A retrospective study evaluating the citation accuracy of the top 10 ranked surgical journals using the SJCR indicators. For each year between 2015 and 2020, the top 10 cited studies were selected, totaling 60 studies from each journal. From each individual study, 10 citations were randomly selected and evaluated for accuracy. Categories of inaccuracy included fact not found, study not found, contradictory conclusion, citation of a citation, and inaccurate population.

RESULTS

A total of 5973 citations were evaluated for accuracy. Of all the citations analyzed, 15.2% of them had an inaccuracy. There was no statistically significant difference in citations inaccuracy rates among the years studied (P = .38) or study level of evidence (P = .21). Annals of Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Annals of Surgical Oncology had significantly more citation inaccuracies than other journals evaluated (P < .05). JAMA Surgery, The Journal of Endovascular Therapy and The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery had significantly fewer citation inaccuracies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although 84.8% of citations from 2015-2020 were determined to be accurate, citation inaccuracies continue to be prevalent throughout highly-ranked surgical literature. There were no significant differences identified in citation inaccuracy rates between the years evaluated or based on study level of evidence.

Quotation Accuracy of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols on Acupuncture

Currently, published systematic review protocols (SR protocols) have increasingly become a new trend in fields such as acupuncture and are therefore a new source of quotations in these fields. Systematic reviews are considered the pinnacle of the evidence pyramid as they embody comprehensive literature searching. Quotations are key elements to achieve this goal as they can support the assertions of the original authors, but the ‘misquotation’ exists, too, and they can be misleading to the reader. The aim of this study was to examine the quotation accuracy of SR protocols in a meta-analysis on acupuncture research. We searched SCOPUS through 31 December, 2020, and each protocol and its citations were analyzed and classified as correct or incorrect. We used descriptive statistics to report the quotation errors and characteristics of the included protocols. The results showed 248 SR protocols, where 124 protocols received quotations and 38 quotations (31.4%) were erroneous. Only 11 (4.4%) of the published SRs and SR protocols had been published previously. Furthermore, the scientific journal in which the most SR protocols were published was Medicine (193; 77.8%), followed by BMJ Open (39; 15.7%). Authors from China (86.5%) were the most productive in publishing SRs and SR protocols. Finally, we concluded that the number of SR protocols and meta-analyses published in scientific journals and indexed by databases exceeds the publication capacity of the SRs associated with them, generating scientific literature that does not make any novel contribution to knowledge.

[Citation misuse and its effects on public health]

In order to effectively contribute to scientific knowledge, biomedical observations have to be validated and debated by scientists in the relevant field. Along this debate that mainly takes place in the scientific literature, citation of previous studies plays a major role. However, only a few academic studies have quantitatively evaluated the suitability and accuracy of scientific citations. Here we review these academic studies. Two types of misuse have been pointed out: Citation bias and citation distortion. First, scientific citations favor positive results and those supporting authors' conclusion. Second, many statements linked to a reference actually misrepresent the referenced findings. About 10% of all citations in biomedicine are strongly inaccurate and misleading for the reader. Finally, we give two examples illustrating how some citation misuses do affect public health: The opioid crisis in the USA and the unjustified fostering of hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19 treatment in France.