Literature DB >> 18302781

Factors related to the frequency of citation of epidemiologic publications.

Kristian B Filion1, I Barry Pless.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that the frequency with which a publication is cited varies greatly. Our objective was to determine whether author, country, journal, or topic were associated with the number of times an epidemiological publication is cited.
METHODS: We used outcome-based sampling and investigated one public health issue - child injury prevention, and one clinical topic - coronary artery disease (CAD) prevention. Using the Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI) Web of Science(R) databases, we limited searches to full articles involving humans published in English between 1998 and 2004. We calculated the citation rate and, after frequency-matching on year of publication, selected the 36 most frequently cited and 36 least frequently cited articles per year, for a total of 252 highly-cited and 252 infrequently-cited articles per topic area (child injury prevention and CAD prevention).
RESULTS: Highly-cited articles in both CAD and child injury prevention were more likely to be published in medium or high impact journals or in journals with medium or high circulations. They were also more likely to be published by authors from U.S. institutions. Among articles examining CAD prevention, the highly-cited articles often involved risk factors, and the association between topics and frequency of citation persisted after adjusting for impact factor. Among articles addressing child injury prevention, topic was not statistically associated with citation.
CONCLUSION: Journal and country appear to be the factors most strongly associated with frequency of citation. In particular, highly-cited articles are predominantly published in high-impact, high-circulation journals. The factors, however, differ somewhat depending on the area of research the journals represent. Among CAD prevention articles, for example, topic is also an important predictor of citation whereas the same is not true for articles addressing injury prevention. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Our objective was to determine whether author, country, journal, or topic were associated with the number of times an epidemiological publication is cited. We used outcome-based sampling and investigated one public health issue, child injury prevention, and one clinical topic, coronary artery disease (CAD) prevention. Using the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science(R) databases, we limited searches to full articles involving humans published in English between 1998 and 2004. We calculated the citation rate and, after frequency-matching on year of publication, selected the 36 most frequently cited and 36 least frequently cited articles per year, for a total of 252 highly-cited and 252 infrequently-cited articles per topic area (child injury prevention and CAD prevention). Highly-cited articles in both CAD and child injury prevention were more likely to be published in medium or high impact journals or in journals with medium or high circulations. They were also more likely to be published by authors from U.S. institutions. Among articles examining CAD prevention, the highly-cited articles often involved risk factors, and the association between topics and frequency of citation persisted after adjusting for impact factor. Among articles addressing child injury prevention, topic was not statistically associated with citation.

Entities:  

Year:  2008        PMID: 18302781      PMCID: PMC2291053          DOI: 10.1186/1742-5573-5-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiol Perspect Innov        ISSN: 1742-5573


Introduction

The mission of this Journal includes publishing "epidemiology-based policy analysis, critical analyses of the field and its practices, or various contributions to methodology, philosophy, or other perspectives on the field" [1]. As is true for most journals, Epidemiologic Perspectives and Innovations wishes to publish work that is influential at many levels, including clinical practice, health policy, and future research. One objective measure of the influence of a publication on future research is the frequency with which the study is cited in subsequent publications. "Citationology", a term coined by Garfield, refers to "the theory and practice of citation, including its derivative disciplines citation analysis and bibiometrics" [2]. Citationology has been examined in many fields, ranging from sociology [3] to health sciences [4]. In these studies, much attention has been focused on the large body of literature that is uncited and somewhat less on the characteristics of the relatively few journals in which a large proportion of all cited work is published [5]. In a two-article series using data from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), Hamilton found that approximately 46% of papers in medicine remain uncited 5 years after publication [6,7]. However, as Pendlebury noted in a letter to the editor, this may be an overestimate because Hamilton's statistics include every type of publication, including obituaries, editorials, abstracts, letters, and other marginalia which, together, represent about 27% of all items indexed [8]. In another study, Callaham et al. investigated journal prestige and other characteristics associated with the citation of studies in peer-reviewed journals and found that the impact factor was the most important predictor [9]. Factors related to citation frequency differed depending on the field of enquiry, however. In this study, we sought to determine if author, institution, country, journal, or topic are associated with the number of times a publication is cited. To test the robustness of our findings we chose to examine these relationships in 2 highly contrasting areas, child injury prevention and coronary artery disease (CAD) prevention, both of which were viewed from an epidemiological perspective.

Materials and methods

We used outcome-based sampling to examine this relationship and searched the ISI Web of Science®, including the Science Citation Index Expanded™ (SCI EXPANDED™), the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), and the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI). For child injury prevention, we used the search terms "child*" and ("injury" or "accident") and "prevention", and for CAD prevention, we used ("coronary artery disease" or "coronary heart disease") and "prevention". We performed this search in March 2007. All searches were limited to full articles containing original research involving human subjects and to articles published in English between 1998 and 2004. We examined the results year by year. To minimize the potential effects of different latency periods between publication of the original manuscript and publication of the citing manuscript, we limited the search to articles published between 1998 and 2004, thus providing at least 2 years for the most recent citing manuscript to be published. We assumed that the number of citations is affected by the time since publication, e.g., that an article published in 1998 is likely to have been cited more frequently than one published in 2004. To account for this, we calculated the citation rate using the following formula: Consequently, if an article published in 2000 was cited 300 times, its citation rate would be 300/(2005-2000) = 60 citations per year. To minimize bias, we also used frequency-matching, selecting the 36 most frequently cited and 36 most infrequently cited articles for each year for each topic area (child injury prevention and CAD prevention). With 36 highly-cited and 36 infrequently cited articles per topic per year, our final sample had 252 highly-cited and 252 infrequently-cited articles examining child injury prevention and 252 highly-cited and 252 infrequently-cited articles examining CAD prevention. For each article we recorded the following characteristics: authors, journal name and type, topic, institution, country, and year of publication. In addition, we obtained the circulation for each journal from Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory. Because previous circulation data were not available, we used current circulation as a proxy, and categorized the results as low (<18,000), medium (18,000 – 50,000), or high (>50,000) circulation. Impact factors for 2001 were obtained from ISI Web of Knowledge. A journal's impact factor represents the mean number of times an article published in the last two years was cited [10]. We categorized impact factors as low (<2.7), medium (2.7 – 9.0), or high (≥10.0). These 2001 impact factors were used as a proxy for the average of each journal's impact factors over the study period. Among publications examining child injury prevention, we classified articles according to the following topics: burns/fire, education, guns, motor vehicle, playground/sporting, or other injuries. Among those examining CAD prevention, we grouped topics into medications, new technologies, risk factors, or other issues. Statistical analyses consisted first of a descriptive phase where we provided the distribution of the following characteristics: authors, institution, country, topic, and journals by name, type, circulation, and impact factor. Nominal data are presented as counts or proportions, and continuous data as means ± standard deviation (SD). In a subsequent analytic phase, Fisher null hypothesis tests were used to examine the association between whether a publication is highly or infrequently cited and the following factors: country, topic, and journal name, type, circulation, and impact factor. Nominal data were compared using Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate, and continuous data using student t-tests. We also used the stratified (Cochran-) Mantel-Haenszel to test the association across impact factor strata. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.1 (SAS, SAS Institute, Gary, NC).

Results

Author, institution, and country

The CAD prevention articles involved over 2,500 authors whereas the child injury prevention articles involved 1,700 authors. Over 90% of authors appeared on only 1 publication. Most institutions of origin also only appeared on only 1 publication during the study period. Institutions with more than 2 publications are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The Centers for Disease Control had the greatest number of highly-cited publications on injury prevention, whereas Harvard University produced the most highly-cited research papers on CAD prevention.
Table 1

Institutions of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining coronary artery disease prevention (%).

InstitutionHighly-CitedInfrequently-Cited
Harvard University11.90
National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (USA)2.80
National Public Health Institute (Australia)2.00
University of California at San Francisco2.00
University of Texas2.02.0
Cleveland Clinic1.60
Centre for Disease Control and Prevention1.60
University of Munster1.60
Baylor College of Medicine1.21.6
National Heart and Lung Institute (UK)1.20
Tufts University1.20
University of Glasgow1.21.6
University of Massachusetts1.20
University of Southern California1.22.0
University of Washington1.20
University of Birmingham01.2
University of Chicago01.2
University of London, Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine01.2
University of North Carolina01.2
University of Ottawa02.0
University of Toronto01.2
Other*66.184.8

* Includes all institutions with 2 or fewer publications included in our study

Table 2

Institutions of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining child injury prevention (%).

InstitutionHighly-CitedInfrequently-Cited
Centre for Disease Control and Prevention5.20.4
University of Guelph2.80
American Academy of Pediatrics2.40
University of Alabama2.40
Johns Hopkins2.00
Children's Hospital (Philadelphia)1.60
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development1.60
University of Pittsburgh1.60
Children's Hospital (Pittsburgh)1.22.0
Ohio State University1.20
Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation1.20
Queens University1.20
University of Iowa1.20
University of Ottawa1.20
University of Sao Paulo1.20
Hospital for Sick Children01.2
Karolinska Institutet01.6
Tel Aviv University01.2
University of Athens01.2
University of Auckland01.6
University of California at Los Angeles01.2
University of Missouri01.2
University of North Carolina01.2
University of New Mexico01.2
Other*72.086.0

* Includes all institutions with 2 or fewer publications included in our study

Institutions of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining coronary artery disease prevention (%). * Includes all institutions with 2 or fewer publications included in our study Institutions of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining child injury prevention (%). * Includes all institutions with 2 or fewer publications included in our study Studies conducted in the United States were more likely to be highly-cited than those conducted in other countries. This relationship was statistically significant for both topic areas (Tables 3 and 4).
Table 3

Characteristics of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining coronary artery disease prevention

CharacteristicHighly-CitedInfrequently-CitedP-Value
Year (mean ± SD)2000.9 ± 2.02000.9 ± 2.10.66
Journal Name (%)
 Circulation23.40.8<0.0001
 Lancet6.80
 JAMA12.30
 Journal of the American College of Cardiology4.00
 New England Journal of Medicine7.90
 Other45.699.2
Journal Type (%)
 Cardiovascular35.227.8<0.0001
 Endocrinology/Metabolism3.95.6
 General Medicine43.420.6
 Health Services or Heath Policy07.1
 Nutrition/Diet4.74.0
 Pharmacology2.39.9
 Public, Environmental, or Occupational Health3.17.5
 Other7.417.5
Journal Circulation (%)
 High36.16.0<0.0001
 Medium42.17.5
 Low21.886.5
Journal Impact Factor (%)
 High54.41.6<0.0001
 Medium33.710.7
 Low11.987.7
Topic (%)
 Medications44.542.50.04
 New Technologies4.03.6
 Risk Factors36.929.8
 Other14.724.2
Country (%)
 United States61.532.9<0.0001
 United Kingdom16.711.9
 Other21.855.2

Abbreviations: SD = standard deviation, JAMA = Journal of the American Medical Association

Table 4

Characteristics of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining injury prevention among children.

CharacteristicHighly-CitedInfrequently-CitedP-Value
Year (mean ± SD)2000.9 ± 2.02000.9 ± 2.10.66
Journal Name (%)
 Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine3.60.8<0.0001
 Burns4.03.2
 Injury Prevention4.04.0
 Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation0.44.0
 Journal of Paediatric and Child Health1.23.6
 Journal of Paediatric Surgery2.82.8
 Journal of Trauma3.41.6
 Paediatrics19.44.8
 Other61.175.4
Journal Type (%)
 Critical Care/Emergency Room11.816.30.12
 Education2.03.2
 General Medicine9.110.3
 Other20.123.4
 Paediatric30.721.0
 Psychology10.26.7
 Public, Environmental, or Occupational Health16.119.0
Journal Circulation (%)
 High27.45.2<0.0001
 Medium10.75.2
 Low61.989.7
Journal Impact Factor (%)
 High4.00.0<0.0001
 Medium29.05.2
 Low67.194.8
Topic (%)
 Burns/Fire6.410.30.42
 Education8.38.3
 Guns6.04.0
 Motor Vehicle Accidents7.98.7
 Playgrounds/Sports13.19.5
 Other59.158.3
Country (%)
 United States60.743.70.0002
 United Kingdom11.111.5
 Other28.244.8

Abbreviations: SD = standard deviation

Characteristics of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining coronary artery disease prevention Abbreviations: SD = standard deviation, JAMA = Journal of the American Medical Association Characteristics of highly-cited and infrequently-cited publications examining injury prevention among children. Abbreviations: SD = standard deviation

Journal

Highly-cited papers were most likely to be published in journals with large circulation or high impact factors, and circulation and impact factor were highly correlated (r = 0.77). Thus, among CAD prevention publications, highly-cited articles were more likely to be published in Circulation, the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, the Journal of the American Medical Association, the Lancet, or the New England Journal of Medicine rather than other journals (Table 3). For injury prevention papers, highly-cited publications appeared in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Burns, Injury Prevention, the Journal of Trauma, and Pediatrics (Table 4). Thus, in both categories, highly-cited publications appeared in journals with medium or high circulation and medium or high impact factors (Tables 3, 4) and infrequently-cited papers were in journals with low impact factors or low circulation.

Topic

Topic was also associated with citation frequency only among CAD prevention papers. Highly-cited articles were more likely to discuss risk factors, whereas infrequently cited papers addressed other, general topics (Table 3). This association persisted after adjusting for impact factor (p = 0.04). For child injury prevention, there was no significant association between topic and frequency of citation (Table 4). Infrequently-cited papers may be more likely to examine burn prevention than highly-cited ones, but this relationship did not reach statistical significance and remains after adjusting for impact factor (p = 0.68).

Discussion

Perhaps not surprisingly, the journal, reflecting in part impact factor and circulation, was most strongly associated with the frequency with which a publication was cited. This was particularly evident among publications examining CAD prevention, where almost 80% of highly-cited articles were in medium- or high-impact journals compared with 12% of infrequently-cited publications. For CAD, we also found topic to be associated with frequency of citation and to the country where the research was done. For both CAD and injury prevention they were far more likely to come from the United States. The factors found to be related to frequency of citation are themselves highly correlated, and these correlations must be considered when interpreting these results. For example, it is likely that journal of publication lies in the causal pathway because high-impact journals more often publish articles about interesting or timely topics. Consequently, adjusting for intermediate variables such as journal, impact factor, or circulation is likely to result in an underestimation of the effect of topic on citation frequency. In addition, impact factor is derived from how often a journal is cited. It is thus difficult to interpret the importance of the association between impact factor and future citation. Furthermore, adjusting for impact factor, which is highly correlated with frequency of citation by definition, may attenuate the observed effect of topic. However, similar results were obtained when adjusting for journal circulation instead of impact factor. This indicates the importance of choosing the 'best' journal (high circulation, high impact, or both) if authors hope to influence readers by virtue of the frequency with which their work is likely to be cited by others. Only a small number of studies in the epidemiological literature have examined publication characteristics associated with citation frequency. The most prominent of these was performed by Callaham et al. [9]. They found impact factor to be the most important predictor, as did we. Additional important predictors were subjective newsworthiness (from a Delphi panel rating), sample size, and the presence of a control group. Perhaps surprisingly, statistically significant results were not found to be an important predictor of citation frequency. In another study, Callaham et al. examined the citation rate among articles submitted to emergency medicine research journals compared with non-emergency medicine journals [11]. They found that the average citation rate among the emergency medicine journals was 2.04 times per year whereas the citation rate among similar articles published in non-emergency medicine journals was at least twice as high. Fifteen percent of articles published in emergency medicine journals were never cited, compared with only 5% of those published in non-emergency medicine journals. This finding could be attributable to the fact that the mean impact factor of the non-emergency medicine journals was substantially higher than that of the emergency medicine journals (4.3 vs 1.5), which further highlights the importance of impact factor as a predictor of the frequency of citation. Previous citation studies have also examined the rates of papers that are never cited [12]. Schwartz found that 46% of all publications in medicine (including marginalia) were never cited by other authors [12]. Considering only full articles, the proportion was 22% – similar to rates from other physical sciences, including Physics (47% among all publications, 17% among articles only), Biological Sciences (41% and 19%, respectively), and Mathematics (55% and 26%, respectively). The proportion of uncitedness in these fields is substantially lower than those of other disciplines, including the Humanities (98% among all publications, 93% among articles only) and Social Sciences (75% and 48%, respectively). The work conducted by Schwartz also highlights a key challenge in citationology – the definition of the 'population at risk'. It remains unclear whether all publications in journals catalogued by the ISI should be considered 'at risk' for citation or whether analyses should be restricted to original articles. Furthermore, given the imperfect sensitivity of literature search tools, even well-defined searches will likely produce incomplete results. As a result, it is difficult to identify the entire 'population at risk' of being cited or to calculate measures such as the risk of citation. These difficulties in identifying the 'population at risk' also prevent the use of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis which could provide valuable information regarding time to citation – a dimension of likely relevance for many authors. Another important challenge in examining citations is the effect of time. Calendar time can affect the citation of an article in three important ways. First, there is the potential effect of partial years. It is unlikely that an article will be published on January 1st and equally unlikely that a literature search will be conducted on December 31st. Consequently, both the year of publication and the year of search are, in fact, partial years, the effects of which need to be considered when interpreting the results. To minimize the effects of these partial years, we frequency-matched on year of publication. Second, there is a latency period between the decision to cite an article and the publication of the citing article. This latency period can be highly variable, depending on the number of times the article is submitted, different review times, and the duration of the 'in press' period. Although the increasing popularity of open access and electronic journals likely will shorten this period, a minimum, unavoidable latency period will always remain. In the present study, therefore, we restricted our analysis to papers published between 1998 and 2004, thus allowing at least two years for the citing manuscript to be published. Third, the citation trajectory of most articles is concave-down (Figure 1); i.e., most articles experience a period of increasing citation followed by one of decreasing citation. As such, it is perhaps too simple to just examine rates of citations per year. Calendar time-citation interaction is particularly important when focusing on specific citation rates.
Figure 1

Citation trajectory of one highly-cited article examining CAD prevention. This manuscript was published in 1998, and these citation data were extracted in April 2007.

Citation trajectory of one highly-cited article examining CAD prevention. This manuscript was published in 1998, and these citation data were extracted in April 2007.

Limitations

Our study has several limitations. First, to detect important differences for some variables (e.g., author, institution), even this relatively large sample is insufficient. It is also possible that the significant results may be the result of type 1 errors. Second, although our results are generally consistent for CAD prevention and child injury prevention, the generalizability of the findings is uncertain. Additional studies involving other epidemiologic topics will be needed to determine how universal these results are. Third, we used 2001 impact factors and assumed them to be roughly the average of any journal's impact factors over the study period. Although it would have been preferable in a design sense to have used 1998 impact factors, because the impact factors of some journals have risen sharply over the last 12 years [13], these may not be representative of later values. However, with a maximum of only 4 years between publication and the 2001 midpoint and the categorization of impact factor as low, medium, or high, it is unlikely that the use of 2001 impact factors as a proxy introduces an important bias. Fourth, we used current circulation data as a proxy because earlier circulation data were unavailable. This is not ideal, but journal subscriptions do not greatly fluctuate over a 7 year period and it is especially unlikely that a journal would move from one circulation category (low, medium, or high) to another over this time. Also, due to the presence of institutional subscriptions, available subscription data likely underestimate the number of readers of a given journal. Finally, as discussed previously, there are the potential effects of calendar time that we have tried to minimize by frequency-matching and by incorporating a minimum latency period into our study design.

Conclusion

Journal, impact factor, and circulation were the factors significantly associated to the frequency of citation of epidemiologic publications. These associations were present for publications addressing child injury prevention and those examining CAD prevention. Topic also appeared to be associated with citation frequency among CAD prevention articles.

Authors' contributions

KF contributed to study design, data collection and analysis, interpretation of results, and drafting and revising the manuscript. IBP contributed to study design, data collection, interpretation of results, and revising the manuscript.
  6 in total

1.  Citation characteristics of research published in Emergency Medicine versus other scientific journals.

Authors:  M Callaham; E Weber; R Wears
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.721

2.  Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals.

Authors:  Michael Callaham; Robert L Wears; Ellen Weber
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-06-05       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Publishing by--and for?--the numbers.

Authors:  D P Hamilton
Journal:  Science       Date:  1990-12-07       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views.

Authors:  Mabel Chew; Elmer V Villanueva; Martin B Van Der Weyden
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Science, citation, and funding.

Authors:  D A Pendlebury
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-03-22       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Research papers: who's uncited now?

Authors:  D P Hamilton
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-01-04       Impact factor: 47.728

  6 in total
  10 in total

Review 1.  Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials published in Intensive Care Medicine from 2001 to 2010.

Authors:  Nicola Latronico; Marta Metelli; Maddalena Turin; Simone Piva; Frank A Rasulo; Cosetta Minelli
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Brief alcohol intervention trials conducted by higher prestige authors and published in higher impact factor journals are cited more frequently.

Authors:  Emily E Tanner-Smith; Joshua R Polanin
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2016-02-06       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Sri Lanka in global medical research: a scientific analysis of the Sri Lankan research output during 2000-2009.

Authors:  Priyanga Ranasinghe; Ranil Jayawardena; Prasad Katulanda
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2012-02-24

4.  Is quality and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in high impact radiology journals associated with citation rates?

Authors:  Christian B van der Pol; Matthew D F McInnes; William Petrcich; Adam S Tunis; Ramez Hanna
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Auto-correlation of journal impact factor for consensus research reporting statements: a cohort study.

Authors:  Daniel R Shanahan
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article's citations.

Authors:  S K Chua; Ahmad M Qureshi; Vijay Krishnan; Dinker R Pai; Laila B Kamal; Sharmilla Gunasegaran; M Z Afzal; Lahiru Ambawatta; J Y Gan; P Y Kew; Than Winn; Suneet Sood
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-03-02

7.  Journal impact factor, trial effect size, and methodological quality appear scantly related: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael Saginur; Dean Fergusson; Tinghua Zhang; Karen Yeates; Tim Ramsay; George Wells; David Moher
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2020-03-09

8.  Mapping the global research landscape on insulin resistance: Visualization and bibliometric analysis.

Authors:  Sa'ed H Zyoud; Muna Shakhshir; Amer Koni; Amani S Abushanab; Moyad Shahwan; Ammar Abdulrahman Jairoun; Rand Al Subu; Adham Abu Taha; Samah W Al-Jabi
Journal:  World J Diabetes       Date:  2022-09-15

9.  The impact of article length on the number of future citations: a bibliometric analysis of general medicine journals.

Authors:  Matthew E Falagas; Angeliki Zarkali; Drosos E Karageorgopoulos; Vangelis Bardakas; Michael N Mavros
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Recent trends in biomedical informatics: a study based on JAMIA articles.

Authors:  Xiaoqian Jiang; Krystal Tse; Shuang Wang; Son Doan; Hyeoneui Kim; Lucila Ohno-Machado
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 4.497

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.