Quality of Research and Citation Frequency
Author Information
Author(s): Nieminen Pentti, Carpenter James, Rucker Gerta, Schumacher Martin
Hypothesis
Publications are cited for a variety of reasons, but the effect of statistical reporting and inappropriate statistical analysis on the number of citations is minimal.
Conclusion
In this cohort of published research, measures of reporting quality and appropriate statistical analysis were not associated with the number of citations.
Supporting Evidence
- Unclear or inadequate reporting of the research question and primary outcome were not statistically significantly associated with the citation counts.
- After adjusting for journal, extended description of statistical procedures had a positive effect on the number of citations received.
- Inappropriate statistical analysis did not affect the number of citations received.
Takeaway
This study looked at whether how well research is reported affects how often it gets cited. It found that the journal's reputation matters more than the quality of the research reporting.
Methodology
The study evaluated all original research articles published in 1996 in four psychiatric journals, assessing their statistical and reporting quality and the number of citations received.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the selection of journals with varying impact factors.
Limitations
The study only included articles from four journals and may not represent all psychiatric research.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.048
Confidence Interval
95% CI 0.80 – 1.20
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website