Citation Analysis of Sports Medicine Research, 1981-1996 Productivity, Impact and Influence of Nations, Institutions and Researchers

presented by

Eugene Garfield
Chairman Emeritus, ISI
Publisher, The Scientist
3501 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Tel. 215-243-2205
Fax 215-387-1266
Home Page:

presented at

American College of Sports Medicine 44th Annual Meeting


May 13, 1997

Academics rely on peer review, meaning subjective human judgment, for evaluating research performance. However, modern databases which index millions of research papers permit us, through publication and citation analysis to view the research world with some new objective perspectives which can validate peer review opinions. This process can provide better-informed judgments to those responsible for funding research.
How To Do A Search

Figure A

ISI launched Current Contents(r) in the 1950s and then in the early 1960s, the Science Citation Index(r). SCI(r) included not only full bibliographic information on each journal article, including author names and addresses, article titles, journal names, and pagination, but also the references listed or cited in these papers. The Science Citation Index enables you to find out what someone has published, a traditional index function, but also what other papers have cited them. The idea is this: if you know a paper or book that is related to your own interests, then other papers that cite that publication may be important to you as well. In this schematic diagram, you see how a paper by Harold Urey has been indexed in the SCI. I used this slide recently to remind people that the question of life on Mars was hot news 35 years ago too!

The SCI offered researchers a new way of searching the literature. The method had been utilized in American case law for decades. Let me emphasize that both Current Contents and the Science Citation Index were created for purposes of information retrieval and dissemination -- not research analysis or evaluation. The latter use came to the fore as computer technology advanced and ISI's indexes reached "critical mass." But even a few years after we started the SCI, and Social Sciences Citation Index(r) in the late 1960s, the files were already used for evaluation.

Sociologists of science and, soon after them, research administrators and science-policy analysts, went to the library shelves to use the printed Science Citation Index. This group sensed that citations were useful indicators of the utility, significance, and influence of scientific work: Simply, the more citations a paper received, the more useful it probably had been to the scientific community. Citation scores were seen as akin to polling figures; as with polling data, one can and does encounter artifacts in the data (negative citation, self citations, citation circles or cabals, wherein friends cite friends). Time does not permit me to discuss all the pros and cons of citation analysis. There is a vast literature on it. Today I am going to concentrate on showing you real data that leave little room for debate. You can judge whether the tabulations I'll show you match your perceptions of what is important or significant in the field of sports medicine.

Let me close this introduction by referring you to the recent voluminous report of the National Research Council which ranked over 5,000 academic departments in the United States:

"The clearest relationship between ratings of the 'scholarly quality of program faculty' and these productivity measures occurred with respect to 'citation' - with faculty in top-rated programs cited much more often than faculty in lower-rated programs who published."

Thirty years of detailed studies have demonstrated the validity of citation analysis. Citation analyses correlate well with peer judgments of significance. Thus, citation analysis should generally bring to light which papers, people, institutions, nations, and journals have contributed in greatest measure to the advance of research in a specific field. That's the approach we've taken with sports medicine.

There is a fundamental distinction that must be made in a multi-disciplinary field like sports medicine. On the one hand, there is what we can call the literature of sports medicine. Then there is the literature of interest to sports medicine researchers.

The first part of my presentation utilizes the literature of sports medicine -- narrowly defined by the top 53 sports medicine journals. The second part of my talk concerns the additional scientific journals that sports researchers depend upon from fields like physiology, nutrition, cardiology and orthopedics. Citation analysis is controversial but its relevance is rarely disputed when it draws on large aggregations of data. In this talk, I will provide a global macro-perspective by nation, institution, or journal. Then we'll take a microview of the most-published and most-cited authors. At an even more specific level, we'll look at long-term, high-impact papers and then more recent hot papers.
Figure: 1

Journals Use To Define Sports Medicine

Coverage Began:

Exercise and Sports Science Reviews 1985
Sports Medicine 1994
American Journal of Sports Medicine 1980
American Journal of Sports Medicine 1980
Journal of Sports & Exercise Psychology 1988 
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 1980
Human Movement Science 1982
International Journal of Sports Medicine 1981
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 1980
Quest 1988
Clinics in Sports Medicine 1983
Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 1991
Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 1974
Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 1990
Journal of Sports & Exercise Psychology 1988
Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 1988
Quest 1988
Sociology of Sport Journal 1990
Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 1990
Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiolog 1991
International Journal of Sport Nutrition 1992 
Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology 1993
Gait & Posture 1993
Pediatric Exercise Science 1993
Sports Psychologist 1993
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports  1993
and 28 other titles, for a total of 53 journals and 23,354 papers  .

Here are the top 25 journals out of 53 that we used to create the literature of sports medicine database. (This database is available from David Pendlebury of ISI.) They are arranged by the date they were added to the ISI database. That date is in the last column. From 1981-96, 23,354 papers were published in these 53 journals.

These 23,354 papers were cited a total of 68,754 times by the end of 1996, for an average of 2.94 citations per paper for the field. The corresponding figure for the whole ISI file, including SCI and SSCI is about 9.1. More about that later.

National Performance

National Performance: Output, 1981-96




Sports Papers


% All Fields

1 US 13381 57.3 39.0 
2 Canada  1903 8.2 5.0 
3 Germany 1120 3.4 7.7 
4 England 635  2.7 7.5 
5 Italy  537 2.3 3.0 
6 Australia  509 2.2 2.4 
7 Japan  433 1.9 7.6 
8 Netherlands 432  1.9 2.1 
9 France 406  1.7  5.6 
10 Sweden 405 1.7  1.8 
11 Finland 324 1.4 0.7 
12 Belgium 169 0.7 1.1 
13 Denmark 167 0.7 0.9 
14 Israel 131 0.6 1.2 
15 South Africa 115 0.5 0.6 
16 Switzerland 115 0.5 1.5 
17 Poland 114 0.5 1.0 
18 Austria 109 0.5 0.7 
19 Norway 106 0.5 0.6 
20 Scotland 79 0.4 1.1 


In the next Figure (3), we've ranked countries by the number of papers published in our sports medicine database from 1981 to 1996. US and Canadian authors dominate this field and together produce over 65% of the papers. This is in contrast to 44% when you consider ISI's total database covering all fields of research.

National Performance: Impact, 1981-96

Rank Country Citations Papers  Impact
1 Sweden  3469  405  8.57
Estonia  23  7.67
Costa Rica  7.00
Switzerland  750  115 6.52
South Africa  584  115  5.08
Netherland  2139  432  4.95
USSR  94  19  4.95
Finland  1538  324 4.75
Ger Dem Rep  18  4.50
10  Denmark  640  167 3.83
11  Canada  6546  1903  3.44
12  US  44235  13381  3.31
13  Belgium  501 169 2.96
14  Australia  1496 509 2.94
15  Israel  372  131 2.84
16  Poland  307 114  2.69
17  Norway  281 106 2.65
18  Czech Rep  47  18  2.61
19  Bulgaria  13  5 2.60
20  Scotland  243 97  2.51 

To obtain a more qualitative perspective, we can create a more level playing field by using impact -- citations per paper -- and in this slide you see that several other smaller countries from Sweden to Canada perform better on this basis. Keep in mind that as the number of published papers gets smaller, the figures are less robust since a few papers can distort the result.

Growth of Sports Medicine

Figure : 4


ChartObject Average Number of Citations Per Paper

ChartObject Total Number of Citations

ChartObject Total Number of Citations

In Figure 4, we have plotted the annual output in sports medicine journals year by year from 1981-96. There is a chronological bias introduced in 1993 or 1994 when ISI added more journals to cover this field for Focus on Sports Medicine.

The middle portion of this slide shows the cumulative number of citations to papers published in each year. The bottom portion shows the cumulative impact.
Figure : 5

SPORTS MEDICINE, 5-Year Periods, 1981-96

Figure 5: The graphs summarize output, citations, and citation impact for Sports Medicine in five-year periods for 1981-96. 

Another perspective on these data is provided in Figure 5 where we have plotted data for 5-year periods, thus smoothing out some of the year-to-year variations. 

ChartObject Total Number of Papers

ChartObject Total Number of Citations

ChartObject Average Number of Citations Per Paper



In Figure 6, we move down to the individual universities where most of the research is done in this field. On the left are the 15 high output schools like Wisconsin, Texas, and Illinois. On the right are the highest in citations and includes Ball State University.
Figure:6Institutional Performance, 1981-96


Figure:7: INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE, 1981-96 (Institutions publishing 14 or more papers ranked by impact)

In Figure 7, we've ranked universities by impact, that is, average cites per paper. This particular slide is preliminary data which does not yet take into account variations in the 6,000 addresses involved, of which 4,000 occur but once! So 2,000 institutions publish 2 or more papers each. 1370 published 3 or more and 1,030 published 4 or more.


Rank Instution Papers Cites Impact
1 University of Stockholm, Sweden 14 687 49.1
2 Umea University, Sweden 18 340 18.9
3 Loma Linda University, California 39 483 12.4
4 Center for Disease Control, Atlanta 17 209 12.3
5 Institute for Aerobic Research, Dallas 27 308 11.4
6 University of Geneva, Switzerland 18 194 10.8
7 Linkoping University Hospital, Sweden 54 547 10.1
8 Washington University, St. Louis 66 649 9.8
9 So Calif Ctr Sports Med, Long Beach 23 209 9.1
10 Karolinska Hospital & Institute, Sweden 166 1497 9.0
11 California State University, Long Beach  25 224 9.0
12 State University of Limburg, Netherlands 65 566 8.7
13 University of Bern, Switzerland 25 215 8.6
14 University of Oulu, Finland 24 203 8.5
15 University of Munster, Germany 23 187 8.1
16 Def & Civil Inst of Environ Med, Canada 35 283 8.1
17 CUNY, Brooklyn College 14 111 7.9
18 University of California, Berkeley 69 512 7.4
19 York University 33 244 7.4
20 University of Vermont 65 463 7.1



Figure 8:


1 D.L. Costill  Ball StateUniversity 113
2 R.J. Shephard University of Toronto 112
3 R.H. Strauss Ohio State University, Columbus 99
4 J. Keul University of Freiburg, Germany 91
5 D.L. Herbert Herbert Benson & Scott Attorneys 88
6 W. Hollmann  German Sports Univ, Cologne 86
7 W. Kindermann U of Saarland, Saarbrucken, Germany 68
8 G.O Johnson University of Nebraska 66
9 B. Stamford University of Louisville 66
10 T.J. Housh University of Nebraska 64
11 H. Weicker University of Heidelberg, Germany 59
12 J.H.Wilmore University of Texas 58
13 R.F. Warren Hospital for Special Surgery, NYC 57
14 J.R. Andrews Amer Sprts Med Inst, Birmingham 56
15 W. J. Fink Ball State University 56
16 T.D. Noakes University of Capetown, South Africa 56
17 P.M. Clarkson University of Massachusetts 54
18 M. L.Pollock University of Florida 53
19 C. Bouchard  University of Laval, Canada 52
20 C. Foster University of Wisconsin 52

Moving down another level of aggregation, we get to individual authors. These data take into account all authors --
not just first authors. I presume that most of these names are familiar to you.


In Figure 9, we've listed authors by total citations and there is quite a shift in the rankings.


1 D.L. Costill Ball State University, Muncie, Ind 1139
2 W.J. Fink  Ball State University, Muncie, Ind 637
3 G.A.V.Borg University of Stockholm 627
4 R.J. Shephard  University of Toronto 539
5 P.V. Komi University of Jyvaskyla, Finland 525
6 I. Jacobs Defense Inst for Envir Med, Canada 518
7 D.C. Nieman Loma Linda University, California 504
8 J. Gillquist Linkoping Univ Hosp, Sweden 491
9 T.D. Noakes University of Capetown, South Africa 432
10 B. Sjodin National Defense Res. Estab., Sweden 432
11 W.P Morgan University of Wisconsin, Madison 431
12 G.A. Brooks  University of California, Berkeley 425
13 R.B. Armstrong  University of Georgia, Athens 390
14 W. Hollmann  German Sports Univ, Cologne 387
15 R.F. Warren Hospital for Special Surgery, NYC 386
16 C. Bouchard University of Laval, Canada 381
17 J.M. Hagberg University of Maryland, Baltimore 380
18 T.G. Lohman University of Arizona, Tucson 374
19 B. Ekblom Karolinska Institute, Sweden 371
20 F.R. Noyes Deaconess Hospital, Cincinnati 356

Figure 10: AUTHOR PERFORMANCE, 1981-96 - TOP 20 IN IMPACT (those who have published 16 or more papers, or one each year).

In Figure 10, we have listed 20 authors by impact -- cited per paper -- and this produces yet another ranking.


1 J. M. Hagberg University of Maryland 23.8 (16)
2 B. Ekblom Karolinska Institute, Sweden 20.6 (18)
3 R. B. Armstrong University of Georgia 20.5 (19)
4 B. Sjodin Natl Defense Res Estab, Sweden 18.0 (24)
5 I. Jacobs Defense Inst for Envr Med, Canada 17.9 (29)
6 B. Dufaux German Sports University, Cologne 15.9 (16)
7 G. S.Krahenbuhl Arizona State University 15.5 (17)
8 D. C. Nieman Loma Linda University 14.8 (34)
9 J. Gillquist Linkoping University, Sweden 14.4 (34)
10 G. A. Brooks University of California, Berkeley 13.7 (31)
11 J. O. Holloszy Washington University, St. Louis 13.6 (21)
12 W. L. Haskell Stanford University 13.6 (18)
13 T. Baranowski Medical College of Georgia 13.3 (16)
14 W. P. Morgan University of Wisconsin 13.1 (33)
15 J. E. Tibone Georgetown University 12.9 (16)
16 M. Alen University of Oulu, Finland 12.1 (19)
17 E. Eriksson Karolinska Institute, Sweden 12.1 (19)
18 J. F. Sallis  San Diego State University 12.0 (23)
19 M. G. Flynn University of Toledo 11.6 (28)
20 M. Solomonow Louisiana State University 11.5 (16)

Journal Output

Figure 11: JOURNAL OUTPUT, 1981-96-Top 16 Journals (300 or more papers)

In Figure 11 we've ranked journals by productivity.

Journal Output, 1981-96

1 Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 4487
2 International Journal of Sports Medicine 2537
3 Physician and Sportsmedicine 2319
4 American Journal of Sports Medicine 1923
5 Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 1299
6 Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness 1023
7 Clinics in Sports Medicine 763
8 Sports Medicine 714
9 International Journal of Sport Psychology 642
10 Human Movement Science 466
11 Journal of Human Movement Studies 461
12 Foot and Ankle International 456
13 Jrnl of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy 409
14 Medical Problems of Performing Artists 342
15 Strength and Conditioning 324
16 Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 300

Figure 12: JOURNAL CITATIONS, 1981-96 - Top 15 Journals

In Figure 12, by total citations. As in all other fields, a small group of journals accounts for a large percentage.
  Journal Citations
1 Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 22666
2 American Journal of Sports Medicine 11038
3 International Journal of Sports Medicine 9900
4 Sports Medicine 4850
5 Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 4455
6 Human Movement Science 1983
7 Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 1967
8 Physician and Sportsmedicine 1926
9 Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 1635
10 Clinics in Sports Medicine 1592
11 International Journal of Sport Psychology 999
12 Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews 703
13 QUEST 628
14 Journal of Human Movement Studies 607
15 Medical Problems of Performing Artists 566

Figure 13: CUMULATIVE JOURNAL IMPACT, 1981-96 - TOP 16 Journals

At the outset, I said we would start by discussing the journals of sports medicine. But what about the other journals used by sports medicine researchers?
1 Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews 17.15
2 Sports Medicine 6.79
3 American Journal of Sports Medicine 5.74
4 Journal of Sports & Exercise Psychology 5.45
5 Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 5.05
6 Human Movement Science 4.26
7 International Journal of Sports Medicine 3.9
8 Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 3.43
9 Quest 2.2
10 Clinics in Sports Medicine 2.09
11 Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 1.94
12 Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness 1.92
13 Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 1.69
14 Sociology of Sport Journal 1.69
15 Medical Problems of Performing Artists 1.65
16 International Journal of Sport Psychology 1.56

In 1993, ISI launched a product called Focus on: Sports Science & Medicine. Slide 14A will give you an idea of the range of sports this covers. However, it is the medical outcomes of these activities that are our primary concern today.

Focus On: Sports Science & Medicine is a bibliographic information product with abstracts which is sold to academic sports medicine physicians, exercise physiologists, kinesiologists, orthopedists, physical therapists, athletic trainers, coaches, and university & medical librarians. Current Awareness searching is available via monthly diskette. A retrospective CD-ROM was introduced in 1996 which now covers 1993 to 1996.

 Figure 13A: (below) Shows the range of sports covered in Focus On.


Sports Covered

Adapted sports  Football Sailing
Aerobics Gymnastics Scuba-diving
Archery Handball Skiing
Badminton Hang-gliding Sky-diving
Baseball Hiking Soccer
Basketball Hockey Softball
Bicycle sports Ice-skating Surfing
Body Building Lacrosse Swimming
Bunge jumping Marksmanship sports Tennis
Canoeing, Kayaking, & Rafting Martial arts Track and Field
Cricket Orienteering Volleyball
Diving Rock Climbing Water-skiing
Equestrian sports Roller-Blading  
Fencing Rugby  


In contrast to the database created for the previous discussion, Focus on Sports Science and Medicine(r) fully covers not only the journals of sports medicine but also 20 leading journals outside of sports medicine proper. These are listed in Figure 14 below...
Figure: 14

Focus On:Sports Science & Medicine

Additional journals fully covered in Focus On

Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

Annual Review of Physiology

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation


Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine

Clinical Biomechanics

Clinical Orthopaedica and Related Research

European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology

Journal of Applied Physiology

Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume

New England Journal of Medicine

Physiological Reviews

Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine


Sports Medicine Standards and Malpractice Reporter


In addition, in Figure 14A there are dozens of selectively covered journals.

I have little doubt that you will recognize the relevance of these journals. They were selected by using another ISI database called Journal Citation Reports(r). This annual statistical report is now published on CD-ROM and permits you to examine, for all 8,000 ISI journals, the citing and cited patterns for each journal. Let me illustrate these two types of listings.
Figure: 14A

Focus On: Sports Science & Medicine
selectively covered journals

Acta Physiologica Scandinavica
American Heart Journal
American Journal of Cardiology
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism
Annals of Internal Medicine
Annual Review of Nutrition
British Journal of Nutrition
British Medical Journal
Cardiovascular Research
Clinical Nutrition
Clinical Physiology
Hormone and Metabolic Research
JAMA-Journal of the American Medical Association
Journal of Aging and Physical Activity
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
Journal of Biomechanics
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume
Journal of Hand Surgery-British and European Volume
Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics
Journal of Motor Behavior
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
Journal of Rehabilitation
Journal of Sports Chiropractic & Rehabilitation
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection and Critical Care
Mayo Clinic Proceedings
Mediators of Inflammation
Military Medicine
Muscle & Nerve
Nutrition Reviews
Orthopedic Clinics of North America
Physical Therapy
Respiration Physiology
Revue de Chirugie Ortho et Repartrice de L'Appareil
Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Work and Stress
Undersea & Hyperbaric Medicine



In Figure15, we have the list of journals most-cited by one journal -- Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, the largest contributor to this field. This slide shows it as the citing journal. The physiological orientation of the journal is evident. Of the ten journals most cited by authors publishing in this journal, 5 are leading physiology journals.
Figure : 15


In this case, we get a cited journal perspective of the journals which cite the American Journal of Sports Medicine. It has a definite emphasis on orthopedics, not surprising considering that it is published by the American Orthopedic Society of Sports Medicine. Five of the ten journals that cite this journal are in orthopedics.
Figure : 16


As a final perspective on journals, I've listed the 12 journals in the JCR sports science category by current impact factor. This is based on 1995 citations to 1994/93 papers. These numbers are relatively low compared to molecular biology and other fields or disciplines. This is due to factors such as immediacy, half-life and average number of references per paper, and the number of review articles included. These rankings are quite different from those in Slide #14 where I showed you 15-year cumulative impact data.
Figure 17

Figure 17A
To clarify the distinction between cumulative and current impact, I have used yet another ISI file called Journal Performance Indicators to obtain the year-by-year cumulative impacts for Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. The graph visually demonstrates the fluctuations that are possible due to a few highly cited papers.

Figure 18:: JCR SOURCE DATA INCLUDING REVIEW ARTICLES It is also important to note that certain journals publish many review articles. These include Medicine and Science in Sports and Medicine and the Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. Review articles are generally cited more than research or clinical reports and would tend to inflate impact numbers.
Figure 18

Most-Cited Papers



Figure : 19
1 G.A.V. Borg, “Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion,” 570
  Med Sci Spt., 14:377, 1982 [University of Stockholm, Sweden]  
2 E.L. Smith et al, “Physical activity and calcium modalities 229
  for (University of Wisconsin, Madison)  
3 J. Friden et al, “Myofibrillar damage following intense  190
  eccentric exercise in man,” Int J Sports Med, 4:170, 1983[Univ.  
  Umea and Karolinska Inst., Sweden]  
4 Anonymous, “The recommended quantity and quality of  189
  exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and  
  muscular fitness in healthy adults,” Med Sci Spt, 22:170, 1983  
5 G.A. Brooks, “Anaerobic threshold: Review of the concept and 168
  directions for future research,” Med Sci Spt., 17:22, 1985   
  (UC Berkeley)  
6 B.M. Carlson et al, “The regeneration of skeletal muscle fibers 162
  following injury,” Med Sci Spt., 15:187, 1983 [Univ. Michigan]  
7 D. Pette, “Activity induced fast to slow transitions in mammalian 159
  muscle,” Med Sci Spt., 16:517, 1984 [Univ. Constance, Germany]  
8 J. Lysholm et al, “Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results 150
  with special emphasis on the use of a scoring scale,” Amer J  
  Sports Med, 10:150, 1982 [Linkoping Univ Hospital]  
9 R.B. Armstrong, “Mechanisms of exercise-induced delayed onset 133
  muscular soreness,” Med Sci Spt, 16:529, 1984 [Oral Roberts Univ)  
10 H.A. Haupt et al, “Anabolic Steroids -- A review of the  133
  literature,” Amer J Sports Med, 12:469, 1984 [Wake Forest Univ]  

Let's move now to the lowest level of classification, the individual paper. In this slide, I've listed the five most-cited papers 1981-96. The paper by G. A. V. Borg of the University of Stockholm appears to be the citation superstar of this field. It is a Citation Classic by any standard.

All of these papers were published in the 1980s so I'm sure that some of them are not cited much any more because they are part of the accepted wisdom of the field.

However, the paper by Haupt continues to be cited about ten times per year -- not surprising considering the topic.

All twelve papers were cited more than 130 times.

Hot Papers


For a view of more recent highly cited papers in the field, we can restrict our view to papers published from 1994-1996; the most cited of these we call "hot papers," because they are both highly cited and of recent vintage. In fact, all nine of the papers on this slide and the next one were published in 1994, so it took about 2 1/2 years to achieve these results.
Figure: 20


1 W.L. Haskell et al, “Health consequences of physical  21
  activity-understanding and challenges regarding the   
  dose response,” Med Sci Spt, 26:649, 1994 [Stanford Univ]  
2 S.V. Brooks et al, “Skeletal-Muscle weakness in old age -  20
  underlying mechanisms,” Med Sci Spt, 26:432, 1994 [Univ  
3 D.B. Pyne, “Regulation of neutrophil function during exercise 17
  Sports Med, 17:245, 1994 [Australian Inst Sport]  
4 B.K. Pedersen et al, “NK cell response to physical activity -  16
  possible mechanisms of action,” Med Sci Spt 26:140, 1994  
  [Univ. of Copenhagen]  
5 I.K.M. Brenner et al, “Infection in athletes,”  15
  Sports Med 17:86,1994 [Univ of Toronto]  
6 D.C. Nieman, et al, “Effect of high-intensity versus moderate- 15
  intensity exercise on lymphocyte subpopulations and   
  proliferative response,” Int J Sp Med 15:199, 1994   
  [Loma Linda Univ, Appalachian State Univ, Univ of S. Carolina]  
7 P. Aglietti et al, “Patellar tendon versus doubled 14
  semitendinosus and gracilis tendons for anterior cruciate   
  ligament reconstruction, Am J Sp Med 22:211, 1994 [Univ of   
8 A. Berg et al, “Physical Activity and Lipoprotein Lipid  14
  Disorders,” Sports Med 17:6, 1994 [Freiburg Univ]  
9 V. Billat, “Reproducibility of running time to exhaustion at  14
  VO2MAX in subelite runners, Med Sci Spt 26:254, 1994   
  [Univ of Paris]  
  The average paper in sports medicine receives approximately .5 cites/year.  

Incidentally, the average sports medicine paper receives .5 cites per year whereas the average cited item in the SCI overall is cited 2.25 times per year. Let me remind you as I said earlier that the average sports medicine paper received 2.94 cites over the 16-year period in contrast to 9.1 for the SCI which verifies that the half-life for this field is much greater.


I think that I've given you enough ammunition to provide some good cocktail party conversations. If you have some doubts about my implicit list of candidates for a future gold medallist in sports medicine research, I suggest you try the known subjective method, sometimes called the "old boys network" and see whether or not our data are validated by peer review. Having served on a number of award committees, you can expect some hot discussion if not fireworks.