Search

Objective: To assess the features of panel members involved in the writing of the ACR-AC and identify alignment with research output and topic-specific research publications. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was performed on the research output of panel members of 34 ACR-AC documents published in 2021. For each author, we searched Medline to record total number of papers (P), total number of ACR-AC papers (C) and total number of previously published papers that are relevant to the ACR-AC topic (R). Results: Three hundred eighty-three different panel members constituted 602 panel positions for creating 34 ACR-AC in 2021 with a median panel size of 17 members. Sixty-eight (17.5%) of experts had been part of ≥10 previously published ACR-AC papers and 154 (40%) were members in ≥ 5 published ACR-AC papers. The median number of previously published papers relevant to the ACR-AC topic was 1 (IQR: 0–5). 44% of the panel members had no previously published paper relevant to the ACR-AC topic. The proportion of ACR-AC papers (C/P) was higher for authors with ≥ 5 ACR-AC papers (0.21) than authors with < 5 ACR-AC papers (0.11, p < 0.0001); however, proportion of relevant papers per topic (R/P) was higher for authors with < 5 ACR-AC papers (0.10) than authors with ≥ 5 ACR-AC papers (0.07). Conclusion: The composition of the ACR Appropriateness Criteria panels reflects many members with little or no previously published literature on the topic of consideration. Similar pool of experts exists on multiple expert panels formulating imaging appropriateness guidelines. Key Points: There were 68 (17.5%) panel experts on ≥ 10 ACR-AC panels. Nearly 45% of the panel experts had zero median number of relevant papers. Fifteen panels (44%) had > 50% of members having zero relevant papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To analyse the coverage and main bibliometric indicators of Insights into Imaging in Scopus and the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Methods: The evolution of journal production in the Scopus database was analysed according to document types, collaboration indexes between authors and institutions, and citation indicators (number of citations, SCImago Journal Rank, quartile, h-index, and most cited works). Networks of collaboration among authors, institutions, and countries were also analysed, as well as those of co-word networks. As a complementary source of information, the Emerging Source Citation Index from the Web of Science database was also considered. Results: Four hundred seventy-four papers were included in Scopus and 292 in ESCI. The index of collaboration was 5.18 for authors and 2.74 for institutions. International collaboration occurred in 24.7% of the papers. The number of citations received in Scopus (4295) exceeds the number of citations received in ESCI (1177). The average number of citations per paper was 9.06 in Scopus versus 4.03 in ESCI. The h-index was 29 in Scopus and 16 in ESCI. Several collaborative groups were identified at the national and international level. Conclusions: There is a progression of Insights into Imaging in the ranking of journals in the area that, if maintained, will allow it to remain in the first quartile in the Scopus database. The main topics of interest were technologies such as 'Magnetic resonance imaging', 'Computed tomography', 'Radiology', and 'Ultrasonography' and diseases such as 'Breast cancer' and those related to 'Paediatrics'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To identify the 100 top-cited meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies published in radiology, medical imaging and nuclear medicine journals. Methods: A PubMed search with pre-defined criteria was performed. The 100 top-cited articles meta-analyses were retrieved, using a custom Python script and the Scopus Application Programming Interface (Elsevier). Publication, citation and affiliation details were extracted from each meta-analysis. No formal statistical analysis was performed. Results: The top meta-analysis was cited 394 times, the 100th meta-analysis 38 times. The USA was the top country represented in the papers (33 meta-analyses) followed by The Netherlands, China and Germany. The journal Radiology published 24 studies. The most common modality reported was positron emission tomography (PET) or PET computed tomography (36 instances), followed by magnetic resonance imaging (30 instances) and computed tomography (27 instances). Cardiac (19 meta-analyses), abdominal (18 meta-analyses), followed by neurological (12 meta-analyses) investigations were the most frequently encountered in the top 100 cited meta-analyses. Conclusions: The 100 top-cited meta-analyses encompass a broad range of imaging modalities and body regions. This may comprise a useful resource for identifying influential evidence-based diagnostic accuracy information in radiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Accurate staging of oesophageal cancer (OC) is vital. Bibliometric analysis highlights key topics and publications that have shaped understanding of a subject. The 100 most cited articles investigating radiological staging of OC are identified. Methods: The Thomas Reuters Web of Science database with search terms including 'CT, PET, EUS, oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer' was used to identify all English language, full-script articles. The 100 most cited articles were further analysed by topic, journal, author, year and institution. Results: A total of 5,500 eligible papers were returned. The most cited paper was Flamen et al. (n = 306), investigating the utility of positron emission tomography (PET) for the staging of patients with potentially operable OC. The most common research topic was accuracy of staging investigations (n = 63). The article with the highest citation rate (38.00), defined as the number of citations divided by the number of complete years published, was Tixier et al. investigating PET texture analysis to predict treatment response to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, cited 114 times since publication in 2011. Conclusion: This bibliometric analysis has identified key publications regarded as important in radiological OC staging. Articles with the highest citation rates all investigated PET imaging, suggesting this modality could be the focus of future research. Main Messages: • This study identifies key articles that investigate radiological staging of oesophageal cancer. • The most common topic was accuracy of staging investigations. • The article with the highest citation rate investigated the use of texture analysis in PET images. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objectives To analyse the coverage and main bibliometric indicators of Insights into Imaging in Scopus and the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Methods The evolution of journal production in the Scopus database was analysed according to document types, collaboration indexes between authors and institutions, and citation indicators (number of citations, SCImago Journal Rank, quartile, h-index, and most cited works). Networks of collaboration among authors, institutions, and countries were also analysed, as well as those of co-word networks. As a complementary source of information, the Emerging Source Citation Index from the Web of Science database was also considered. Results Four hundred seventy-four papers were included in Scopus and 292 in ESCI. The index of collaboration was 5.18 for authors and 2.74 for institutions. International collaboration occurred in 24.7% of the papers. The number of citations received in Scopus (4295) exceeds the number of citations received in ESCI (1177). The average number of citations per paper was 9.06 in Scopus versus 4.03 in ESCI. The h-index was 29 in Scopus and 16 in ESCI. Several collaborative groups were identified at the national and international level. Conclusions There is a progression of Insights into Imaging in the ranking of journals in the area that, if maintained, will allow it to remain in the first quartile in the Scopus database. The main topics of interest were technologies such as ‘Magnetic resonance imaging’, ‘Computed tomography’, ‘Radiology’, and ‘Ultrasonography’ and diseases such as ‘Breast cancer’ and those related to ‘Paediatrics’.

For this reason, ACR AC panels are intentionally composed of individuals with diverse backgrounds and types of expertise. For example, we acknowledge the authors' criticism that most of the ACR AC panel experts are from academic teaching institutions. As the authors note, the entire methodology is also posted online on the main ACR AC landing webpage [[2], [5]-[9]] to bolster the transparency of the process. [Extracted from the article]