Background: Bibliometric analyses are a tool employed by researchers and funding agencies to establish the most important areas of research in a particular field, and to determine which foci need increased research attention. Such analyses have been published in a variety of clinical specialties; however, a detailed literature search showed that no such study has been done for “myeloid neoplasms.” In order to bridge this gap, we conducted a citation analysis of the 100 most influential articles on myeloid neoplasms. Methods: Two independent researchers extracted relevant articles from the Scopus database. These articles were then ranked in descending order of citations and a list of the top 100 original articles was made. A further, more detailed list was created containing significant discriminating characteristics. Results: The top cited articles were published over a period of 47 years, with most of them being published in the 5-year interval of 2001–2005. The citations ranged from 636 to 4,039. The articles originated from 28 different countries. Most of the articles were published in high-impact journals. Conclusion: Our analysis sheds light on the quality of work and driving trends, listing the most cited and impactful guideline articles within this field and aiding clinicians.

1.
Luukkonen
T
.
Bibliometrics and evaluation of research performance
.
Ann Med
.
1990
Jun
;
22
(
3
):
145
50
.
[PubMed]
0785-3890
2.
Cooper
ID
.
Bibliometrics basics
.
J Med Libr Assoc
.
2015
Oct
;
103
(
4
):
217
8
.
[PubMed]
1536-5050
3.
Wallin
JA
.
Bibliometric methods: pitfalls and possibilities
.
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol
.
2005
Nov
;
97
(
5
):
261
75
.
[PubMed]
1742-7835
4.
Ellegaard
O
,
Wallin
JA
.
The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: how great is the impact
.
Scientometrics
.
2015
;
105
(
3
):
1809
31
.
[PubMed]
0138-9130
5.
Agarwal
A
,
Durairajanayagam
D
,
Tatagari
S
,
Esteves
SC
,
Harlev
A
,
Henkel
R
, et al.
.
Bibliometrics: tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics
.
Asian J Androl
.
2016
Mar-Apr
;
18
(
2
):
296
309
.
[PubMed]
1008-682X
6.
Vardiman
JW
.
The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues: an overview with emphasis on the myeloid neoplasms
.
Chem Biol Interact
.
2010
Mar
;
184
(
1-2
):
16
20
.
[PubMed]
0009-2797
7.
Lichtman
MA
.
Battling the hematological malignancies: the 200 years’ war
.
Oncologist
.
2008
Feb
;
13
(
2
):
126
38
.
[PubMed]
1083-7159
8.
Arber
DA
,
Orazi
A
,
Hasserjian
R
,
Thiele
J
,
Borowitz
MJ
,
Le Beau
MM
,
Bloomfield
CD
,
Cazzola
M
,
Vardiman
JW
. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood.
2016
Jan 1:blood-2016.
9.
Lim
KJ
,
Yoon
DY
,
Yun
EJ
,
Seo
YL
,
Baek
S
,
Gu
DH
, et al.
.
Characteristics and trends of radiology research: a survey of original articles published in AJR and Radiology between 2001 and 2010
.
Radiology
.
2012
Sep
;
264
(
3
):
796
802
.
[PubMed]
0033-8419
10.
Paladugu
R
,
Schein
M
,
Gardezi
S
,
Wise
L
.
One hundred citation classics in general surgical journals
.
World J Surg
.
2002
Sep
;
26
(
9
):
1099
105
.
[PubMed]
0364-2313
11.
Lefaivre
KA
,
Shadgan
B
,
O’Brien
PJ
.
100 most cited articles in orthopaedic surgery
.
Clin Orthop Relat Res
.
2011
May
;
469
(
5
):
1487
97
.
[PubMed]
0009-921X
12.
Ponce
FA
,
Lozano
AM
.
Highly cited works in neurosurgery. Part I: the 100 top-cited papers in neurosurgical journals
.
J Neurosurg
.
2010
Feb
;
112
(
2
):
223
32
.
[PubMed]
0022-3085
13.
Shuaib
W
,
Costa
JL
.
Anatomy of success: 100 most cited articles in diabetes research
.
Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab
.
2015
Aug
;
6
(
4
):
163
73
.
[PubMed]
2042-0188
14.
Hennessey
K
,
Afshar
K
,
Macneily
AE
.
The top 100 cited articles in urology
.
Can Urol Assoc J
.
2009
Aug
;
3
(
4
):
293
302
.
[PubMed]
1911-6470
15.
Brandt
JS
,
Downing
AC
,
Howard
DL
,
Kofinas
JD
,
Chasen
ST
.
Citation classics in obstetrics and gynecology: the 100 most frequently cited journal articles in the last 50 years
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol
.
2010
Oct
;
203
(
4
):
355.e1
7
.
[PubMed]
0002-9378
16.
Usman
MS
,
Siddiqi
TJ
,
Khan
MS
,
Fatima
K
,
Butler
J
,
Manning
WJ
, et al.
.
A scientific analysis of the 100 citation classics of valvular heart disease
.
Am J Cardiol
.
2017
Oct
;
120
(
8
):
1440
9
.
[PubMed]
0002-9149
17.
Sztompka
P.
Society in action: The theory of social becoming. University of Chicago Press;
1991
Aug 27.
18.
Seglen
PO
.
Citation rates and journal impact factors are not suitable for evaluation of research
.
Acta Orthop Scand
.
1998
Jun
;
69
(
3
):
224
9
.
[PubMed]
0001-6470
19.
Brookes
BC
.
Bradford’s law and the bibliography of science
.
Nature
.
1969
Dec
;
224
(
5223
):
953
6
.
[PubMed]
0028-0836
20.
Stossel
TP
.
Volume: papers and academic promotion
.
Ann Intern Med
.
1987
Jan
;
106
(
1
):
146
9
.
[PubMed]
0003-4819
21.
Siddiqi
TJ
,
Usman
MS
,
Khan
MS
,
Fatima
K
,
Norbash
A
,
Qureshi
AI
, et al.
.
The 100 Most Influential Papers in the Field of Thrombolytic Therapy: A Bibliometric Analysis
.
Am J Cardiovasc Drugs
.
2017
Aug
;
17
(
4
):
319
33
.
[PubMed]
1175-3277
22.
Shuaib
W
,
Acevedo
JN
,
Khan
MS
,
Santiago
LJ
,
Gaeta
TJ
.
The top 100 cited articles published in emergency medicine journals
.
Am J Emerg Med
.
2015
Aug
;
33
(
8
):
1066
71
.
[PubMed]
0735-6757
23.
Dubin
D
,
Häfner
AW
,
Arndt
KA
.
Citation classics in clinical dermatologic journals. Citation analysis, biomedical journals, and landmark articles, 1945-1990
.
Arch Dermatol
.
1993
Sep
;
129
(
9
):
1121
9
.
[PubMed]
0003-987X
24.
Falagas
ME
,
Pitsouni
EI
,
Malietzis
GA
,
Pappas
G
.
Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: strengths and weaknesses
.
FASEB J
.
2008
Feb
;
22
(
2
):
338
42
.
[PubMed]
0892-6638
25.
Bakkalbasi
N
,
Bauer
K
,
Glover
J
,
Wang
L
.
Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science
.
Biomed Digit Libr
.
2006
Jun
;
3
(
1
):
7
.
[PubMed]
1742-5581
26.
Kulkarni
AV
,
Aziz
B
,
Shams
I
,
Busse
JW
.
Author self-citation in the general medicine literature
.
PLoS One
.
2011
;
6
(
6
):
e20885
.
[PubMed]
1932-6203
27.
Moed
HF
.
The impact-factors debate: the ISI’s uses and limits
.
Nature
.
2002
Feb
;
415
(
6873
):
731
2
.
[PubMed]
0028-0836
You do not currently have access to this content.