IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i6d10.1007_s11192-024-05016-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How biomedical papers accumulated their clinical citations: a large-scale retrospective analysis based on PubMed

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Li

    (Huazhong University of Science and Technology)

  • Xuli Tang

    (Central China Normal University)

  • Wei Lu

    (Wuhan University)

Abstract

This paper explored the temporal characteristics of clinical citations of biomedical papers, including how long it takes to receive its first clinical citation (the initial stage) and how long it takes to receive two or more clinical citations after its first clinical citation (the build-up stage). Over 23 million biomedical papers in PubMed between 1940 and 2013 and their clinical citations are used as the research data. We divide these biomedical papers into three groups and four categories from clinical citation level and translational science perspectives. We compare the temporal characteristics of biomedical papers of different groups or categories. From the perspective of clinical citation level, the results show that highly clinically cited papers had obvious advantages of receiving clinical citations over medium and lowly clinically cited papers in both the initial and build-up stages. Meanwhile, as the number of clinical citations increased in the build-up stage, the difference in the length of time to receive the corresponding number of clinical citations among the three groups of biomedical papers significantly increased. From the perspective of translational science, the results reveal that biomedical papers closer to clinical science more easily receive clinical citations than papers closer to basic science in both the initial and build-up stages. Moreover, we found that highly clinically cited papers had the desperate advantage of receiving clinical citations over even the clinical guidelines or clinical trials. The robustness analysis of the two aspects demonstrates the reliability of our results. The indicators proposed in this paper could be useful for pharmaceutical companies and government policy-makers to monitor the translational progress of biomedical research. Besides, the findings in this study could be interesting for young scholars in biomedicine to get more attention from clinical science and to obtain success in their scientific careers, especially for those in basic science.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Li & Xuli Tang & Wei Lu, 2024. "How biomedical papers accumulated their clinical citations: a large-scale retrospective analysis based on PubMed," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3315-3339, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05016-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05016-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-05016-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-05016-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S. R. Goldberg & H. Anthony & T. S. Evans, 2015. "Modelling citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1577-1604, December.
    2. Ke, Qing, 2020. "The citation disadvantage of clinical research," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    3. B Ian Hutchins & Matthew T Davis & Rebecca A Meseroll & George M Santangelo, 2019. "Predicting translational progress in biomedical research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-25, October.
    4. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli & Cheng, Qikai, 2022. "Predicting the clinical citation count of biomedical papers using multilayer perceptron neural network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    5. Eugene I KaneIII & Gail L Daumit & Kevin M Fain & Roberta W Scherer & Emma Elizabeth McGinty, 2022. "Evaluating the Revised National Institutes of Health clinical trial definition impact on recruitment progress," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 249-256.
    6. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli, 2021. "Characterizing interdisciplinarity in drug research: A translational science perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    7. Grant Lewison & Guillermo Paraje, 2004. "The classification of biomedical journals by research level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(2), pages 145-157, June.
    8. Min, Chao & Sun, Jianjun & Pei, Lei & Ding, Ying, 2016. "Measuring delayed recognition for papers: Uneven weighted summation and total citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1153-1165.
    9. Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2016. "Are citations from clinical trials evidence of higher impact research? An analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1341-1351, November.
    10. Yong Huang & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Wei Lu, 2019. "From zero to one: A perspective on citing," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(10), pages 1098-1107, October.
    11. Egghe, L. & Bornmann, L. & Guns, R., 2011. "A proposal for a First-Citation-Speed-Index," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 181-186.
    12. Leo Egghe, 2000. "A Heuristic Study of the First-Citation Distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 48(3), pages 345-359, July.
    13. Magnus Eriksson & Annika Billhult & Tommy Billhult & Elena Pallari & Grant Lewison, 2020. "A new database of the references on international clinical practice guidelines: a facility for the evaluation of clinical research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1221-1235, February.
    14. Xin Li & Xuli Tang & Wei Lu, 2023. "Tracking biomedical articles along the translational continuum: a measure based on biomedical knowledge representation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1295-1319, February.
    15. Jian Du & Yishan Wu, 2018. "A parameter-free index for identifying under-cited sleeping beauties in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 959-971, August.
    16. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan van Eck & Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2012. "Universality of citation distributions revisited," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(1), pages 72-77, January.
    17. Francis Narin & Gabriel Pinski & Helen Hofer Gee, 1976. "Structure of the Biomedical Literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 27(1), pages 25-45, January.
    18. Quentin L. Burrel, 2001. "Stochastic modelling of the first-citation distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(1), pages 3-12, September.
    19. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan van Eck & Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2012. "Universality of citation distributions revisited," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(1), pages 72-77, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli & Lu, Wei, 2024. "Investigating clinical links in edge-labeled citation networks of biomedical research: A translational science perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli & Lu, Wei, 2024. "Investigating clinical links in edge-labeled citation networks of biomedical research: A translational science perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3).
    2. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli & Cheng, Qikai, 2022. "Predicting the clinical citation count of biomedical papers using multilayer perceptron neural network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    3. Dongyu Zang & Chunli Liu, 2023. "Exploring the clinical translation intensity of papers published by the world’s top scientists in basic medicine," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2371-2416, April.
    4. Xin Li & Xuli Tang & Wei Lu, 2023. "Tracking biomedical articles along the translational continuum: a measure based on biomedical knowledge representation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1295-1319, February.
    5. Zhifeng Liu & Chenlin Wang & Ruojia Wang, 2024. "From bench to bedside: determining what drives academic citations in clinical trials," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(11), pages 6813-6837, November.
    6. Pei-Shan Chi & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2024. "Two sides of the same coin? Citation obsolescence and impact of different publication types and subject fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 6373-6386, October.
    7. Higashide, Noriyuki & Zhang, Yi & Asatani, Kimitaka & Miura, Takahiro & Sakata, Ichiro, 2024. "Quantifying advances from basic research to applied research in material science," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli, 2021. "Characterizing interdisciplinarity in drug research: A translational science perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    9. Boyack, Kevin W. & Patek, Michael & Ungar, Lyle H. & Yoon, Patrick & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Classification of individual articles from all of science by research level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12.
    10. Leo Egghe, 2007. "Probabilities for encountering genius, basic, ordinary or insignificant papers based on the cumulative nth citation distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 167-181, January.
    11. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Costas, Rodrigo, 2018. "Individual and field citation distributions in 29 broad scientific fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 868-892.
    12. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    13. Quentin L. Burrell, 2002. "The nth-citation distribution and obsolescence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 309-323, March.
    14. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Costas, Rodrigo, 2014. "The skewness of scientific productivity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 917-934.
    15. Zhihui Zhang & Ying Cheng & Nian Cai Liu, 2015. "Improving the normalization effect of mean-based method from the perspective of optimization: optimization-based linear methods and their performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 587-607, January.
    16. Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso & Brito, Ricardo, 2024. "Rank analysis of most cited publications, a new approach for research assessments," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    17. Thelwall, Mike & Wilson, Paul, 2014. "Distributions for cited articles from individual subjects and years," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 824-839.
    18. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    19. Li, Xin & Ma, Xiaodi & Feng, Ye, 2024. "Early identification of breakthrough research from sleeping beauties using machine learning," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    20. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou & Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "How can journal impact factors be normalized across fields of science? An assessment in terms of percentile ranks and fractional counts," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 96-107, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05016-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.