| Article Access Statistics | | | Viewed | 1086 | | | Printed | 10 | | | Emailed | 0 | | | PDF Downloaded | 51 | | | Comments | [Add] | | |
|
Click on image for details.
|
|
 |
| CORRESPONDENCE |
|
|
|
| Year : 2016 | Volume
: 64
| Issue : 6 | Page : 1400-1419 |
Author's reply: Highest cited papers published in Neurology India for the years 1993–2014: The revised list
Paritosh Pandey1, Venkatesan Subeikshanan2, Venkatesh S Madhugiri3
1 Department of Neurosurgery, Manipal Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
2 MBBS Student, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Puducherry, India
3 Division of Neurosurgery, Tata Memorial Center, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| Date of Web Publication | 11-Nov-2016 |
Correspondence Address:
Paritosh Pandey
Department of Neurosurgery, Manipal Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.193756
How to cite this article:
Pandey P, Subeikshanan V, Madhugiri VS. Author's reply: Highest cited papers published in Neurology India for the years 1993–2014: The revised list. Neurol India 2016;64:1400-19 |
How to cite this URL:
Pandey P, Subeikshanan V, Madhugiri VS. Author's reply: Highest cited papers published in Neurology India for the years 1993–2014: The revised list. Neurol India [serial online] 2016 [cited 2019 Aug 23];64:1400-19. Available from: http://www.neurologyindia.com/text.asp?2016/64/6/1400/193756 |
Sir,
We thank Dr. Vedantam Rajshekhar for his letter detailing his concerns regarding our results in the paper “Highest cited papers published in Neurology India: An analysis for the years 1993–2014.”[1] He has also pointed out an error wherein a highly cited paper he has authored has been missed out, whereas it should have actually appeared on the rank list.
We acknowledge that this is indeed an error and apologize for this. We have looked at our entire dataset again, and we have been unable to discern any other similar errors. We would like to explain, therefore, how this error came to be.
Data regarding the papers published in Neurology India between 1993 and 2014 was derived from two sources independently by two authors. One author (VS) manually copied the table of contents from the archives of the journal website. The other author (VSM) generated the list of papers published between 1993 and 2014 from the Web of Science (®, Thomson Reuters) website. These lists were merged on MS Excel (2016, Microsoft Corp) and duplicates were deleted.
In this particular instance, the paper that appears to have been left out is a review article by Prof. Rajshekhar – Rajshekhar V. Management of hydrocephalus in patients with tuberculous meningitis. Neurol India 2009;57:368-74. [PMID: 19770534][2]
A search on PubMed reveals that there are two papers, both published in Neurology India in 2009, with exactly the same title. One is the previously mentioned review article and the other is a letter to the editor regarding this article by Yadav PR and Parihar V (PMID: 19934588).[3] A search on Google Scholar reveals that the paper itself has received 66 citations to date whereas the letter by Yadav et al., regarding this review article has received 3 citations.
The only automated step in this study was the elimination of duplicates, and it appears that, in this process, the actual review paper was inadvertently deleted whereas the letter to the editor about this article with exactly the same title was retained and ranked at 1666 [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]. | Figure 1: Demonstrates the results of a search on PubMed with the title of the paper as the search string showing the two papers with exact title matchestitle.
Click here to view |
 | Figure 2: Results of a search on Google Scholar showing 66 citations for the review article and 3 citations for the correspondence regarding this paper
Click here to view |
 | Figure 3: Snapshot of our original dataset showing the letter to the editor with 3 citations ranked at 1666
Click here to view |
Despite two authors independently collating data, this error has crept in and we are grateful to Dr. Rajshekhar for pointing this out. We constantly endeavor to improve the process we employ for scientometric analysis and this is an important learning experience. While we would like to attain a Six Sigma level of efficiency, it is quite obvious that we are not quite there yet! We would also be grateful if all readers of Neurology India could peruse the tables [Table 1] and [Table 2] appended and point out any similar/other omissions or errors, and thus add to the discourse regarding this data. | Table 1: Corrected list of 100 papers with the highest total number of citations published in Neurology India between 1993 and 2014. The newly included paper is bold and italicized and is highlighted in gray
Click here to view |
 | Table 2: Corrected rank list of papers with the highest citations per year since the time of their publication in Neurology India. This list is ranked on the basis of citations received per post-publication year. The newly included paper is bold and italicized and is highlighted in gray
Click here to view |
As it stands, when the omitted paper is included in the list, it is ranked at joint 17th position [Table 1]. On the citations per year rank list, this paper ranks 6th [Table 2].
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| » References | |  |
| 1. | Pandey P, Subeikshanan V, Madhugiri VS. Highest cited papers published in Neurology India: An analysis for the years 1993-2014. Neurol India 2016:64:703-21.  |
| 2. | Rajshekhar V. Management of hydrocephalus in patients with tuberculous meningitis. 2009:57:368-74. |
| 3. | Yadav Y R, Parihar V. Management of hydrocephalus in patients with tuberculous meningitis. Neurol India 2009;57:691. [ PUBMED]  |
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]
[Table 1], [Table 2]
|
