The 100 top-cited articles in menopausal syndrome: a bibliometric analysis

• 主要な著者: Zishan Jin (著者), Chuanxi Tian (著者), Mengjiao Kang (著者), Shiwan Hu (著者), Linhua Zhao (著者), Wei Zhang (著者)
• フォーマット: 図書
• 出版事項: BMC, 2024-04-01T00:00:00Z.
• 主題: article
• オンライン･アクセス: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1186/s12978-024-01770-9; 1742-4755
• Keywords: Menopausal syndrome; Systematic review; Bibliometric analysis; Gynecology and obstetrics; RG1-991
• Source: Reproductive Health, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-22 (2024)

Abstract Background Significant scientific research has been conducted concerning menopausal syndrome(MPS), yet few bibliometric analyses have been performed. Our aim was to recognise the 100 most highly cited published articles on MPS and to analytically evaluate their key features. Methods To identify the 100 most frequently cited articles, a search was conducted on Web of Science using the term 'menopausal syndrome'. Articles that matched the predetermined criteria were scrutinised to obtain the following data: citation ranking, year of publication, publishing journal, journal impact factor, country of origin, academic institution, authors, study type, and keywords. Results The publication period is from January 1, 2000, to August 31, 2022. The maximum number of citations was 406 and in 2012. The median citations per year was 39.70. Most of the articles focused on treatment and complications. These articles were published in 36 different journals, with the Journal of MENOPAUSE having published the greatest number (14%). Forty-eight articles (48%) were from the United States, with the University of Pittsburgh being the leading institute (9%). Joann E. Manson was the most frequent first author (n = 6). Observational studies were the most frequently conducted research type (n = 53), followed by experimental studies (n = 33). Keyword analysis identified classic research topics, including genitourinary syndrome of menopause, bone mineral density (BMD), and anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) loci. Conclusion Using bibliometrics, we conducted an analysis to identify the inadequacies, traditional focal points, and potential prospects in the study of MPS across current scientific areas. Treatment and complications are at the core of MPS research, whereas prediction and biomarkers have less literature of high quality. There is a necessity for innovative analytical metrics to measure the real effect of these papers with a high level of citation on clinical application.