Cited by 26scientometrics and bibliometrics researchAcademic Writing and PublishingPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

Are coronectomy studies being cited? A bibliometric study

Yeung, Andy Wai Kan, Wong, Natalie Sui Miu, Leung, Yiu Yan·2019·Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the present bibliometric study was to analyze the citations received by coronectomy papers and their references. Methods: Data were extracted from the Web of Science online database. After excluding irrelevant papers, full record and cited references from 79 papers were downloaded and imported into VOSviewer and CRExplorer for bibliometric analyses. Results: The 79 papers on coronectomy collectively had 9.7 citations per paper. The h‐index of this collection of papers was 17. The top five major contributing countries were the UK (N = 20, 25.3%), the USA (N = 10, 12.7%), Italy (N = 9, 11.4%), China (N = 5, 6.3%), and Turkey (N = 5, 6.3%). The top two major contributing journals, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, together accounted for more than half of the 79 papers (N = 43, 54.4%). Conclusions: Papers dealing with postoperative morbidity topics had high citation counts in general, such as dry socket (27.4 citations per paper), infection (24.6 citations per paper), and safety (35.5 citations per paper). Citation per paper correlated with publication count at the affiliation level, but not at the author, country, and journal levels.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jicd.12366

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • VOSviewer can only read data from one database and cannot merge data from multiple databases.

    “the bibliometric software (i.e., VOSviewer) is only able to read data from one database and cannot merge data from multiple databases (Yeung et al. 2019).”

    From Blockchain technology in the smart city: A bibliometric review (2022) · cites this paper as Yeung et al. 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yeung, A. W. K., Wong, N. S. M., & Leung, Y. Y.
Affiliations
University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Leung, Yiu Yan
Venue
Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-10-15
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
e12366-e12366
ISSN
  • 2041-1618 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-1626
OpenAlex
W2896727578
Cited by
26
References
41
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8
FWCI
2.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
Keywords
coronectomy, citation analysis, research output, postoperative morbidity, dry socket, infection, surgical safety, h-index, publication trends
MeSH terms
Humans, Molar, Third, Publishing, Surgery, Oral, Tooth Extraction, Bibliometrics, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review