Top Citations of Pediatric Emergency Medicine Publications in the Emergency Medicine Literature
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to identify and analyze the 100 most frequently cited journal articles pertaining to the field of pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) and published in emergency medicine (EM) peer-reviewed literature. METHODS: The 3 databases, Scopus Library, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, were subjected to a search by topic, keyword, and publication journal to identify the 100 most frequently cited articles addressing PEM issues in the EM literature. Our search included articles published beginning in 1983 and ending in 2016. Median citation frequency, study topics within the specialty of PEM, years of publication, and countries of origin were each compiled and analyzed. Mean citation frequencies were used to rank the articles, which accounted for differences in the results among the 3 databases. Once organized into a list of the 100 most often cited articles in PEM, those with an outcome of the same mean citation frequency were ranked in alphabetical order, according to the initial letter of last name of the first author of the publication. RESULTS: A ranking was created of the 100 most frequently cited articles in pediatric emergency medicine by the mean number of citations. Citation counts ranged from a high of 249 to a low of 71, with a median frequency of 101. The United States had 92 articles on the list, whereas the remainder was comprised of the following countries: Australia (3), Canada (3), Germany (1), and Spain (1). The most common topic areas (and their numbers) noted were related to resuscitation (23) and anesthesia (22). The most frequently cited 100 articles were all published between the years 1983 and 2010. Top publication years (and number of articles) included 2000 (11), 2002 (8), and 2003 (8). The years ranging from 1993 to 2005 covered 69% of published articles. Journals of publications (and article counts) were Annals of Emergency Medicine (69), Pediatric Emergency Care (15), Academic Emergency Medicine (12), and Resuscitation (4). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides a review of citation frequency of top-cited PEM articles published in EM journals. This determines the influence of these PEM publications on the EM specialty. The importance of education on resuscitation and anesthesia topics in PEM was evident. Most of the articles were published more than 10 to 15 years ago, indicating that they could be considered landmarks in the subspecialty of PEM. This signifies their importance to other authors in this field, who chose to cite them as having created a significant impact on their own publications.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,055 | 0,082 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,011 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,044 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,009 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,149 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».