识别血管外科的颠覆性出版物和变革范式

Eric Sung BA , Joel L. Ramirez MD , Adan Z. Becerra PhD , Emanuel Jaramillo MD , Warren J. Gasper MD , Peter Schneider MD , Michael S. Conte MD , James C. Iannuzzi MD, MPH
{"title":"识别血管外科的颠覆性出版物和变革范式","authors":"Eric Sung BA ,&nbsp;Joel L. Ramirez MD ,&nbsp;Adan Z. Becerra PhD ,&nbsp;Emanuel Jaramillo MD ,&nbsp;Warren J. Gasper MD ,&nbsp;Peter Schneider MD ,&nbsp;Michael S. Conte MD ,&nbsp;James C. Iannuzzi MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.jvsvi.2023.100036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>A novel disruption index (DI) designed to measure impact of scientific research has been developed. However, the DI metric has not yet been applied to vascular surgery peer-reviewed publications. We hypothesized that vascular surgery-specific disruptive articles would increase over time with the advent of new surgical and technological advancements.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The <em>Journal of Vascular Surgery</em> was queried from its inception in 1984 to 2014 to identify the top 100 most disruptive publications. The DI ranges from −1 to 1, where negative scores represent developmental and positive scores indicate disruptive publications. Most impactful papers were identified and defined as being in both the 100 most cited and disruptive lists of publications.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When the top 100 most cited publications were categorized by vascular disease, aortic research was the most frequently highly cited publication (42%). Low correlation was found between DI and citation, controlling for time after publication (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.0096; <em>P</em> = .78). Among the 100 most disruptive papers, publications discussing the field of vascular surgery as a unique subspecialty were the most common category of publication (24%). Narrowing down the 100 most disruptive publications with 50 or more citations (n = 30), aortic (37%) and venous (20%) publications were the most common. Among this group of publications, aortic papers were most disruptive between 1993 to 1997, and venous papers were most disruptive in the more recent years between 2001 to 2005. Eight papers were identified as being most disruptive and included topics of publication of aortic (n = 4), venous (n = 2), carotid (n = 1), and endovascular (n = 1) research, with an average DI of 0.14 and citation count between 174 and 712.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This is the first application of the DI to the field of vascular surgery. Although citation count is a vital metric, there remains limitations in its ability to measure impact. DI should be used in conjunction with citation count to provide a holistic analysis of publication impact. Additionally, the DI can identify shifting paradigms and innovations unique to vascular surgery and help guide education on impactful studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74034,"journal":{"name":"JVS-vascular insights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949912723000338/pdfft?md5=1706275abd44bea3f538b3f6321f5308&pid=1-s2.0-S2949912723000338-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying disruptive publications and changing paradigms in vascular surgery\",\"authors\":\"Eric Sung BA ,&nbsp;Joel L. Ramirez MD ,&nbsp;Adan Z. Becerra PhD ,&nbsp;Emanuel Jaramillo MD ,&nbsp;Warren J. Gasper MD ,&nbsp;Peter Schneider MD ,&nbsp;Michael S. Conte MD ,&nbsp;James C. Iannuzzi MD, MPH\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jvsvi.2023.100036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>A novel disruption index (DI) designed to measure impact of scientific research has been developed. However, the DI metric has not yet been applied to vascular surgery peer-reviewed publications. We hypothesized that vascular surgery-specific disruptive articles would increase over time with the advent of new surgical and technological advancements.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The <em>Journal of Vascular Surgery</em> was queried from its inception in 1984 to 2014 to identify the top 100 most disruptive publications. The DI ranges from −1 to 1, where negative scores represent developmental and positive scores indicate disruptive publications. Most impactful papers were identified and defined as being in both the 100 most cited and disruptive lists of publications.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When the top 100 most cited publications were categorized by vascular disease, aortic research was the most frequently highly cited publication (42%). Low correlation was found between DI and citation, controlling for time after publication (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.0096; <em>P</em> = .78). Among the 100 most disruptive papers, publications discussing the field of vascular surgery as a unique subspecialty were the most common category of publication (24%). Narrowing down the 100 most disruptive publications with 50 or more citations (n = 30), aortic (37%) and venous (20%) publications were the most common. Among this group of publications, aortic papers were most disruptive between 1993 to 1997, and venous papers were most disruptive in the more recent years between 2001 to 2005. Eight papers were identified as being most disruptive and included topics of publication of aortic (n = 4), venous (n = 2), carotid (n = 1), and endovascular (n = 1) research, with an average DI of 0.14 and citation count between 174 and 712.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This is the first application of the DI to the field of vascular surgery. Although citation count is a vital metric, there remains limitations in its ability to measure impact. DI should be used in conjunction with citation count to provide a holistic analysis of publication impact. Additionally, the DI can identify shifting paradigms and innovations unique to vascular surgery and help guide education on impactful studies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JVS-vascular insights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949912723000338/pdfft?md5=1706275abd44bea3f538b3f6321f5308&pid=1-s2.0-S2949912723000338-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JVS-vascular insights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949912723000338\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JVS-vascular insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949912723000338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标 一项旨在衡量科学研究影响力的新型干扰指数(DI)已经开发出来。然而,该指数尚未应用于血管外科同行评审出版物。我们假设,随着新的外科手术和技术进步的出现,血管外科特有的破坏性文章会随着时间的推移而增加。方法对《血管外科杂志》从1984年创刊到2014年进行了查询,以确定前100篇最具破坏性的出版物。DI从-1到1不等,负分代表发展性,正分代表颠覆性。结果当按血管疾病对被引用次数最多的前 100 篇出版物进行分类时,主动脉研究是被引用次数最多的出版物(42%)。在控制发表时间后,发现DI与引用之间的相关性较低(R2 = 0.0096; P = .78)。在100篇最具破坏性的论文中,讨论血管外科作为一个独特的亚专科的论文是最常见的一类论文(24%)。将引用次数达到或超过 50 次的 100 篇最具破坏性的论文(n = 30)范围缩小,主动脉(37%)和静脉(20%)论文最为常见。在这组论文中,1993 年至 1997 年间的主动脉论文最具破坏性,2001 年至 2005 年间的静脉论文最具破坏性。八篇论文被确定为最具破坏性,包括主动脉(4 篇)、静脉(2 篇)、颈动脉(1 篇)和血管内(1 篇)研究的发表主题,平均 DI 为 0.14,引用次数在 174 到 712 之间。虽然引用次数是一项重要指标,但其衡量影响力的能力仍有局限性。应该将《文献综述》与引用次数结合起来使用,以全面分析出版物的影响力。此外,DI 还能发现血管外科特有的范式和创新的转变,并帮助指导有影响力研究的教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying disruptive publications and changing paradigms in vascular surgery

Objective

A novel disruption index (DI) designed to measure impact of scientific research has been developed. However, the DI metric has not yet been applied to vascular surgery peer-reviewed publications. We hypothesized that vascular surgery-specific disruptive articles would increase over time with the advent of new surgical and technological advancements.

Methods

The Journal of Vascular Surgery was queried from its inception in 1984 to 2014 to identify the top 100 most disruptive publications. The DI ranges from −1 to 1, where negative scores represent developmental and positive scores indicate disruptive publications. Most impactful papers were identified and defined as being in both the 100 most cited and disruptive lists of publications.

Results

When the top 100 most cited publications were categorized by vascular disease, aortic research was the most frequently highly cited publication (42%). Low correlation was found between DI and citation, controlling for time after publication (R2 = 0.0096; P = .78). Among the 100 most disruptive papers, publications discussing the field of vascular surgery as a unique subspecialty were the most common category of publication (24%). Narrowing down the 100 most disruptive publications with 50 or more citations (n = 30), aortic (37%) and venous (20%) publications were the most common. Among this group of publications, aortic papers were most disruptive between 1993 to 1997, and venous papers were most disruptive in the more recent years between 2001 to 2005. Eight papers were identified as being most disruptive and included topics of publication of aortic (n = 4), venous (n = 2), carotid (n = 1), and endovascular (n = 1) research, with an average DI of 0.14 and citation count between 174 and 712.

Conclusions

This is the first application of the DI to the field of vascular surgery. Although citation count is a vital metric, there remains limitations in its ability to measure impact. DI should be used in conjunction with citation count to provide a holistic analysis of publication impact. Additionally, the DI can identify shifting paradigms and innovations unique to vascular surgery and help guide education on impactful studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信