Most Common Publication Types of Neuroimaging Literature: Papers With High Levels of Evidence Are on the Rise

This study evaluated the bibliometric data of the most common publication types of the neuroimaging literature. PubMed was searched to identify all published papers with "neuroimaging" as their MeSH Major Topics, and they were further searched by the following publication types: case repor...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers in human neuroscience Vol. 14; p. 136
Main Author Yeung, Andy Wai Kan
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Switzerland Frontiers Research Foundation 28.04.2020
Frontiers Media S.A
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1662-5161
1662-5161
DOI10.3389/fnhum.2020.00136

Cover

More Information
Summary:This study evaluated the bibliometric data of the most common publication types of the neuroimaging literature. PubMed was searched to identify all published papers with "neuroimaging" as their MeSH Major Topics, and they were further searched by the following publication types: case report, clinical trial, comparative study, editorial, evaluation study, guideline, meta-analysis, multicenter study, randomized controlled trial, review, technical report, and validation study. The proportion of papers belonging to each publication type published in neuroimaging journals was calculated. Year-adjusted mean citation counts for each publication type were computed using data from Web of Science. Publication trend and its correlation with citation performance were assessed. Review and comparative study were the most common publication types. Publication types with the highest proportion in neuroimaging journals were guideline, validation study, and technical reports. Since the year 2000, multicenter study, review, and meta-analysis showed the strongest linear increase in annual publication count. These publication types also had the highest year-adjusted citation counts (4.7-10.0). Publication types with the lowest year-adjusted citation counts were editorial and case report (0.5-1.0). It was estimated that 12.5% of the publications labeled as case reports were incorrectly labeled. Neuroimaging literature has been expanding with papers of higher levels of evidence, such as meta-analyses, multicenter studies, and randomized controlled trials.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Undefined-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
Reviewed by: Ruben Miranda, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain; Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico
This article was submitted to Brain Imaging and Stimulation, a section of the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Edited by: Mikhail Lebedev, Duke University, United States
ISSN:1662-5161
1662-5161
DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2020.00136