ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
The 100 most influential papers on Lewy body dementias: a bibliometric analysis.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lewy body dementias (LBDs) are poorly understood neurodegenerative diseases. We aim to uncover the most cited articles and authors in the field, and to analyze the citations for gender differences. Methods: Two authors extracted the relevant articles from Scopus and ranked them according to the number of citations. Separate lists were prepared for the top 100 original articles and the top 15 review articles. Results: The 100 original studies were published from 1980 to 2019, with the greatest number published in the year 2000. The total citations ranged from 350 to 2640, with a median of 494.5. These articles originated from 17 countries, with major contributions from the USA ( Conclusion: Our results provide insights into the research trends and provide a list of the most influential papers on LBDs. Resolving the observed differences and promoting contribution from people all over the world is necessary to accelerate advancement in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.