Chinese contribution to NEJM, Lancet, JAMA, and BMJ from 2011 to 2020: a 10-year bibliometric study

Ann Transl Med. 2022 May;10(9):505. doi: 10.21037/atm-21-6793.

Abstract

Background: New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and British Medical Journal (BMJ) are collectively known as "the Top Four Medical Journals (TFMJ)" in China. Through the analysis of Chinese scholars' publications in the TFMJ in the recent 10 years, this study aimed to clarify the current situation of high-quality medical research conducted by Chinese scholars and institutions.

Methods: Data were retrieved and downloaded manually from PubMed (2011-2020). Information on the publication year, journal, author, affiliation, and citation, etc. were extracted and analyzed using R software.

Results: A total of 761 articles were involved in the final analysis. The number of articles published by Chinese scholars in the TFMJ was 135/29,942 (0.45%) in BMJ, 124/14,033 (0.88%) in JAMA, 314/16,117 (1.94%) in Lancet, and 188/15,242 (1.23%) in NEJM (P<0.001). Besides, the letter was the main research type, which was up to 44.54%, and the original research only accounted for 17.47%. The most popular subspecialty and subject were infectious diseases and COVID-19, respectively. The most productive researcher was Chen Wang, and Bin Cao was the most cited Chinese scholar. The most productive institute was Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College. The most cited study was "Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China".

Conclusions: The presence of Chinese scholars in the TFMJ has grown, but there is still much room to improve. A Matthew effect in China's high-level scientific research was demonstrated.

Keywords: China; Medical research; bibliometric study.