Highly Cited Occupational Therapy Articles in the Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index: A Bibliometric Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A bibliometric analysis was completed of highly cited occupational therapy literature and authors published from 1991 to 2014 and accessible in the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) databases. METHOD: Data were obtained from the SCI-Expanded and SSCI. Articles referenced >100 times were categorized as highly cited articles (HCA). RESULTS: Of 6,486 articles found, 31 were categorized as HCA. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy published the largest number of HCA (n = 8; 26%). The 31 HCA were distributed across seven countries: United States (20 articles), Canada (3), United Kingdom (3), Australia (2), the Netherlands (1), New Zealand (1), and Sweden (1). The three authors with the highest Y-index were S. J. Page, F. Clark, and W. Dunn. CONCLUSION: A latency period of 4 to 5 yr post-publication appears to be needed for a journal article to gain citations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.048 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".