Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2015.42.5.559

The 50 Most Cited Papers in Craniofacial Anomalies and Craniofacial Surgery  

Mahon, Nicola A (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Galway)
Joyce, Cormac W (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Galway)
Thomas, Sangeetha (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peterborough Hospital)
Concannon, Elizabeth (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Galway)
Murray, Dylan (Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Craniofacial Surgery, Temple Street Children's Hospital)
Publication Information
Archives of Plastic Surgery / v.42, no.5, 2015 , pp. 559-566 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background Citation analysis is a recognized scientometric method of classifying cited articles according to the frequency of which they have been referenced. The total number of citations an article receives is considered to reflect it's significance among it's peers. Methods Until now, a bibliometric analysis has never been performed in the specialty of craniofacial anomalies and craniofacial surgery. This citation analysis generates an extensive list of the 50 most influential papers in this developing field. Journals specializing in craniofacial surgery, maxillofacial surgery, plastic surgery, neurosurgery, genetics and pediatrics were searched to demonstrate which articles have cultivated the specialty within the past 55 years. Results The results show an intriguing compilation of papers which outline the fundamental knowledge of craniofacial anomalies and the developments of surgical techniques to manage these patients. Conclusions This citation analysis provides a summation of the current most popular trends in craniofacial literature. These esteemed papers aid to direct our decision making today within this specialty.
Keywords
Bibliometrics; Analysis; Craniofacial abnormality; Anomalies;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Loonen MP, Hage JJ, Kon M. Plastic Surgery Classics: characteristics of 50 top-cited articles in four Plastic Surgery Journals since 1946. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;121:320e-327e.   DOI
2 Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber E. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 2002; 287:2847-50.   DOI
3 Yoon DY, Yun EJ, Ku YJ, et al. Citation classics in radiology journals: the 100 top-cited articles, 1945-2012. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;201:471-81.   DOI
4 Garfield E. The impact factor and its rightful use. Anaesthesist 1998;47:439-40.   DOI
5 Buchanan EP, Xue AS, Hollier LH Jr. Craniofacial syndromes. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;134:128e-153e.   DOI
6 British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons [Internet]. London: Royal College of Surgeons of England; [cited 2015 July 20]. Available from: www.baoms.org.uk/craniofacialsurgery.
7 Hylton JB, Leon-Salazar V, Anderson GC, et al. Multidisciplinary treatment approach in Treacher Collins syndrome. J Dent Child (Chic) 2012;79:15-21.
8 Garfield E. Journal impact factor: a brief review. CMAJ 1999; 161:979-80.
9 Saha S, Saint S, Christakis DA. Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? J Med Libr Assoc 2003;91:42-6.
10 Garfield E. 100 citation classics from the Journal of the American Medical Association. JAMA 1987;257:52-9.   DOI
11 Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 1997;314:498-502.   DOI
12 Hansson S. Impact factor as a misleading tool in evaluation of medical journals. Lancet 1995;346:906.
13 Baltussen A, Kindler CH. Citation classics in anesthetic journals. Anesth Analg 2004;98:443-51.
14 Paladugu R, Schein M, Gardezi S, et al. One hundred citation classics in general surgical journals. World J Surg 2002; 26:1099-105.   DOI
15 Fenton JE, Roy D, Hughes JP, et al. A century of citation classics in otolaryngology-head and neck Surgery journals. J Laryngol Otol 2002;116:494-8.
16 Kelly JC, Glynn RW, O'Briain DE, et al. The 100 classic papers of orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:1338-43.
17 Institute for Scientific Information. Science citation index expanded 1946-2006 [Internet]. New York: Thomson Reuters; [cited 2015 March/April]. Available from: http://www.isiwebofknowledge.com/.
18 Mahon NA, Joyce CW. A bibliometric analysis of the 50 most cited papers in cleft lip and palate. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 2015;49:52-8.   DOI
19 Polley JW, Figueroa AA, Charbel FT, et al. Monobloc craniomaxillofacial distraction osteogenesis in a newborn with severe craniofacial synostosis: a preliminary report. J Craniofac Surg 1995;6:421-3.   DOI
20 Kane AA, Mitchell LE, Craven KP, et al. Observations on a recent increase in plagiocephaly without synostosis. Pediatrics 1996;97:877-85.
21 Bohannon RW, Roberts D. Core journals of rehabilitation: identification through index analysis. Int J Rehabil Res 1991; 14:333-6.   DOI
22 Campbell FM. National bias: a comparison of citation practices by health professionals. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1990;78: 376-82.
23 Link AM. US and non-US submissions: an analysis of review-er bias. JAMA 1998;280:246-7.   DOI
24 Cole S. Citations and the evaluation of individual scientists. Trends Biochem Sci 1989;14:14.
25 Marx W, Schier H, Wanitschek M. Citation analysis using online databases: feasibilities and shortcomings. Scientometrics 2001;52:59-82.   DOI