Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences
Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jama.293.19.2362
复制
发表时间：
2005-05-18
影响因子：
120.7
通讯作者：
Ioannidis, JPA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Patsopoulos, NA;Analatos, AA;Ioannidis, JPA
各种研究设计的相对优点及其在证据层次中的位置经常被讨论。然而，有有限的知识，相对引文影响的文章，使用各种研究designs.ObjectiveTo确定是否类型的研究设计影响率在随后的article.Design和setting.We测量的引文影响的文章，使用各种研究设计，包括荟萃分析，随机对照试验，队列研究，病例对照研究，病例报告，非系统评价，结果Meta分析在1991年和2001年两个研究设计中的被引次数均高于其他研究设计（P
Context The relative merits of various study designs and their placement in hierarchies of evidence are often discussed. However, there is limited knowledge about the relative citation impact of articles using various study designs.Objective To determine whether the type of study design affects the rate of citation in subsequent articles.Design and Setting We measured the citation impact of articles using various study designs-including meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, case reports, nonsystematic reviews, and decision analysis or cost-effectiveness analysis-published in 1991 and in 2001 for a sample of 2646 articles.Main Outcome Measure The citation count through the end of the second year after the year of publication and the total received citations.Results Meta-analyses received more citations than any other study design both in 1991 (P