Citing the innovative work of the original inventors

An analysis of citations to prior clinical trials

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceartikelForskningpeer review

18 Downloads (Pure)

Resumé

Introduction. The massive growth of the scientific literature can result in an abundancy of relevant studies when an author wants to substantiate a claim. References and citations are fundamental bibliometric artefacts yet little guidance is offered to authors regarding the selection between equally relevant references. Only rules of thumb exist, and the present paper provides an overview of the scarce publications within the area. A well-known rule of thumb is to cite seminal work.
Method. The present study aims to analyse the extent to which seminal papers are being cited more or less than more recent studies, when authors cite previous, similar studies. Cohorts of studies addressing the same research question form the data set of the analysis. The data is visualised and analysed using statistical analyses and charts.
Results. The results show that some narrow research questions are addressed by as much as 50 or 100 studies. The results also show that the more citable studies, the smaller the ratio of cited to non-cited studies.
Conclusion. There does not seem to be a general tendency towards older or more recent studies being cited more. The more citable studies the more evenly distributed the share of citations seems to be. The implications for bibliometrics are discussed.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftInformation Research
Vol/bind22
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)1-11
ISSN1368-1613
StatusUdgivet - 2017
Begivenhed9th International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science - Uppsala, Sverige
Varighed: 27. jun. 201629. jun. 2016
Konferencens nummer: 9

Konference

Konference9th International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science
Nummer9
LandSverige
ByUppsala
Periode27/06/201629/06/2016

Fingeraftryk

technical literature
artifact

Emneord

  • bibliometrics
  • Clinical Trials
  • Citation theory

Citer dette

@inproceedings{5c6d302b26f14d4e820b05a9bd7ae8aa,
title = "Citing the innovative work of the original inventors: An analysis of citations to prior clinical trials",
abstract = "Introduction. The massive growth of the amount of scientific literature can result in an abundancy of relevant studies when an author wants to substantiate a claim. References and citations are fundamental bibliometric artefacts yet little guidance is offered to authors regarding the selection between equally relevant references. Only rules of thumb exist, and this paper provides an overview of the scarce publications within the area. One well-known rule of thumb is to cite seminal work. Method. This study analyses the extent to which seminal papers are being cited more or less than more recent studies, when authors cite previous, similar studies. Cohorts of studies addressing the same research question form the data set of the analysis. The data is visualised and analysed using statistical analyses and charts. Results. The results show that some research questions are addressed by as much as 50 or 100 studies. Also, the paper shows that the more citable studies, the smaller the ratio of cited to non-cited studies. Conclusion. There does not seem to be a general tendency towards older or more recent studies being cited more. The more citable studies the more evenly distributed the share of citations seems to be. The implications for bibliometrics are discussed.",
keywords = "bibliometrics, Clinical Trials, Citation theory",
author = "Frandsen, {Tove Faber}",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "1--11",
journal = "Information Research",
issn = "1368-1613",
publisher = "University of Sheffield Department of Information Studies",
number = "1",

}

Citing the innovative work of the original inventors : An analysis of citations to prior clinical trials . / Frandsen, Tove Faber .

I: Information Research, Bind 22, Nr. 1, 2017, s. 1-11.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceartikelForskningpeer review

TY - GEN

T1 - Citing the innovative work of the original inventors

T2 - An analysis of citations to prior clinical trials

AU - Frandsen, Tove Faber

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Introduction. The massive growth of the amount of scientific literature can result in an abundancy of relevant studies when an author wants to substantiate a claim. References and citations are fundamental bibliometric artefacts yet little guidance is offered to authors regarding the selection between equally relevant references. Only rules of thumb exist, and this paper provides an overview of the scarce publications within the area. One well-known rule of thumb is to cite seminal work. Method. This study analyses the extent to which seminal papers are being cited more or less than more recent studies, when authors cite previous, similar studies. Cohorts of studies addressing the same research question form the data set of the analysis. The data is visualised and analysed using statistical analyses and charts. Results. The results show that some research questions are addressed by as much as 50 or 100 studies. Also, the paper shows that the more citable studies, the smaller the ratio of cited to non-cited studies. Conclusion. There does not seem to be a general tendency towards older or more recent studies being cited more. The more citable studies the more evenly distributed the share of citations seems to be. The implications for bibliometrics are discussed.

AB - Introduction. The massive growth of the amount of scientific literature can result in an abundancy of relevant studies when an author wants to substantiate a claim. References and citations are fundamental bibliometric artefacts yet little guidance is offered to authors regarding the selection between equally relevant references. Only rules of thumb exist, and this paper provides an overview of the scarce publications within the area. One well-known rule of thumb is to cite seminal work. Method. This study analyses the extent to which seminal papers are being cited more or less than more recent studies, when authors cite previous, similar studies. Cohorts of studies addressing the same research question form the data set of the analysis. The data is visualised and analysed using statistical analyses and charts. Results. The results show that some research questions are addressed by as much as 50 or 100 studies. Also, the paper shows that the more citable studies, the smaller the ratio of cited to non-cited studies. Conclusion. There does not seem to be a general tendency towards older or more recent studies being cited more. The more citable studies the more evenly distributed the share of citations seems to be. The implications for bibliometrics are discussed.

KW - bibliometrics

KW - Clinical Trials

KW - Citation theory

M3 - Conference article

VL - 22

SP - 1

EP - 11

JO - Information Research

JF - Information Research

SN - 1368-1613

IS - 1

ER -