Introduction: Bibliometric studies can help guide researchers and funding bodies toward fields where more research activity is warranted. Bibliometric analyses have previously been published in many specialties and sub-specialties. Our literature search did not show a bibliometric analysis on pericardial diseases. We performed a bibliometric analysis of the top 100 cited manuscripts on pericardial diseases to identify knowledge.
Material and methods: Bibliometric analysis is a quantitative method to assess research performance and analyze publication trends. Web of Science was searched in April 2020 to identify the top 100 cited manuscripts in pericardial diseases.
Results: Twenty-six out of the top 100 cited manuscripts were published between 2000 and 2009. These manuscripts were cited on average189 times (range: 110-743) since publication. Only two manuscripts were cited > 500 times. Among the top-ten cited manuscripts, there were 6 original articles, 1 case series, and 3 review articles. Of the 3 review articles, 2 were society guidelines. 90% of the authors had written just 1 manuscript. There were ten manuscripts with women as first authors with a significant association between gender of the first and corresponding author (odds ratio = 44, p < 0.001). Only 20% of manuscripts were funded. Most publications came from institutions in the United States (n = 40), Italy (n = 10), and Spain (n = 5).
Conclusions: Our study provides an insight into the characteristics and quality of the highly cited literature in the field of pericardial diseases. This can be used to guide further research in the field of pericardial diseases.
Keywords: bibliometrics; clinical trial; pericardial; research output; women in cardiology.
Copyright: © 2023 Termedia & Banach.