Recently, the most-cited papers of the twenty-first century across all fields were announced (Pearson et al., 2025). Consequently, JDIS was curious about the most-cited papers in the fields of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and the science of science and the trends reflected by these works.
In April 2025, JDIS selected the Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and OpenAlex as the data sources, adopting a paper-level classification to identify bibliometrics-related papers (see Appendix for the details). Table 1 shows the top 10 most-cited bibliometrics-related papers (see Appendix for the Top 25).
Table 1. Top 10 most-cited bibliometrics-related papers. |
| Rank (Median) | Paper | Times cited (range across databases) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping | 10526~14500 |
| 2 | An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output | 7622~10730 |
| 3 | Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis | 4372~6992 |
| 4 | How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines | 4060~4774 |
| 5 | CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature | 2965~4681 |
| 6 | Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization | 2850~3841 |
| 7 | Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses | 2422~3236 |
| 8 | The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis | 2084~3295 |
| 9 | The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge | 1845~2248 |
| 10 | Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization | 1767~2612 |
Source databases: Web of Science, Scopus, OpenAlex. For a list of the top 25 most-cited works, precise data, and methods, see Appendix. |
By grouping the top-cited papers, we identify patterns and propose tips for future research directions. We distinguish four groups.
(1) Bibliometric analysis, Science mapping software, and the future of adopting AI
Among the top 10 papers, six are about the methodology and tools of science mapping. With AI’s development, combining AI, bibliometric analysis, and science mapping may bring new opportunities ①.
(2) Indicators combining different aspects
The papers introducing the h-index and the g-index are among the top 25. Both combine the number of papers and citation impact. Indicators combining or focusing on new aspects bring new energy to the field. Similarly, novelty and disruption measures, though not yet listed in the top 25 are accumulating citations quickly.
(3) Comparison of bibliometric databases
Among the top 25 papers, three papers focus on a comparison of bibliometric databases. New databases, like Dimensions, OpenAlex, Altmetrics, Overton are becoming popular, and comparing their coverage, advantages, and drawbacks attracts a lot of attention ②.
(4) Collaboration and team science
Three papers on research collaboration and team science rank among the top 25. In the era of big science, team-based research has become the prevailing approach. Gaining insight into how teams operate is both timely and essential for enhancing their performance.
Acknowledgement
The authors appreciate the invaluable suggestions from Ronald Rousseau.
Provenance and peer reviewed statement
Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.
Appendix
We consider the papers indexed in Web of Science, Scopus and OpenAlex, and their corresponding citation counts in April 2025.
As bibliometrics-related papers may be published outside the major bibliometrics journals, we use a paper-level classification to identify them. For each database, the classification system and the corresponding selected topics are shown in Table A1. For each selected database and topics, the Top 200 most cited papers are obtained to form three basic datasets. Papers appearing in at least two basic datasets are defined as bibliometrics-related papers. For these papers we obtain their citation count and corresponding rankings within each database. The final ranking is obtained by averaging the rankings in the three databases.
Table A1. The classification systems and selected topics. |
| Database | Classification system | Selected Topics |
|---|---|---|
| Web of Science | Citation Topics-meso level | 6.238 Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity |
| Scopus | Scival | TC.101 Scientometrics; Biomedical Research; Social Media (medical-related topics excluded) |
| OpenAlex | Topics | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics Research |
Table A2 shows the top 25 most-cited metrics-related papers. JDIS has one publication (Chen, C., 2017) among them. Nine of them are authored by Derek de Solla Price awardees (highlighted in bold).
Table A2. Top 25 most-cited bibliometrics-related papers. Citation count (ranking) and assigned topics within each database are shown. The Derek de Solla Price awardees are highlighted in bold. |
| Rank | Publication | Citation Count (ranking) | Topics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OpenAlex | Scopus | WoS | WoS | Scopus | OpenAlex | ||
| 1 | Van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. | 14500(1) | 12553(1) | 10526(1) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Data Visualization and Analytics |
| 2 | Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-16572. | 10730(2) | 8670(2) | 7622(2) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Cognitive Science and Mapping |
| 3 | Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. | 9185(3) | 7573(3) | 6077(3) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Data Analysis with R |
| 4 | Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research, 133, 285-296. | 6992(4) | 5708(4) | 4372(4) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 5 | Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359-377. | 4774(5) | 4814(5) | 4060(5) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Citation Analysis; Bibliology; Scientometrics | Complex Network Analysis Techniques |
| 6 | Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational research methods, 18(3), 429-472. | 4681(6) | 3710(6) | 2965(6) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Innovation and Knowledge Management |
| 7 | Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB journal, 22(2), 338-342. | 3841(7) | 3313(7) | 2850(7) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 8 | Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106, 213-228. | 3236(9) | 2843(8) | 2422(8) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 9 | Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039. | 3295(8) | 2343(9) | 2084(9) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Coauthorship; Scientific Collaboration; Social Network Analysis | Innovation and Knowledge Management |
| 10 | Chen, C. (2004). Searching for intellectual turning points: progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl_1), 5303-5310. | 2248(13) | 2078(10) | 1845(10) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Citation Analysis; Bibliology; Scientometrics | Data Visualization and Analytics |
| 11 | Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. Jama, 295(1), 90-93. | 2612(10) | 1988(12) | 1767(11) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 12 | Cobo, M. J., López‐Herrera, A. G., Herrera‐Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382-1402. | 2352(11) | 2006(11) | 1666(12) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Social Network Analysis | Scientific Computing and Data Management |
| 13 | Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?. Scientometrics, 105, 1809-1831. | 2277(12) | 1832(13) | 1456(15) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 14 | Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152. | 2103(15) | 1830(14) | 1593(13) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 15 | Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of informetrics, 5(1), 146-166. | 2045(16) | 1765(15) | 1505(14) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Social Network Analysis | Complex Network Analysis Techniques |
| 17 | Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics, 111, 1053-1070. | 1944(17) | 1606(17) | 1329(16) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Complex Network Analysis Techniques |
| 16 | Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 9-11. | 2190(14) | 1614(16) | 1070(22) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 18 | Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of informetrics, 4(4), 629-635. | 1843(19) | 1553(18) | 1290(17) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Bibliometric Analysis; Scientometrics | Complex Network Analysis Techniques |
| 19 | Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 101(suppl_1), 5200-5205. | 1853(18) | 1472(19) | 1212(18) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Coauthorship; Scientific Collaboration; Social Network Analysis | Complex Network Analysis Techniques |
| 20 | Chen, C., Ibekwe‐SanJuan, F., & Hou, J. (2010). The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple‐perspective cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1386-1409. | 1545(23) | 1410(20) | 1177(20) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Citation Analysis; Bibliology; Scientometrics | Advanced Text Analysis Techniques |
| 21 | Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of data and information science, 2(2). | 1533(24) | 1397(21) | 1202(19) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Citation Analysis; Bibliology; Scientometrics | Data Visualization and Analytics |
| 22 | Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual review of information science and technology, 37(1), 179-255. | 1672(21) | 1327(22) | 1070(22) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Citation Analysis; Bibliology; Scientometrics | Data Visualization and Analytics |
| 23 | Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of information Science, 28(6), 441-453. | 1530(25) | 1293(23) | 1074(21) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Coauthorship; Scientific Collaboration; Social Network Analysis | Complex Network Analysis Techniques |
| 24 | Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social studies of science, 35(5), 673-702. | 1552(22) | 1222(27) | 1069(24) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Coauthorship; Scientific Collaboration; Social Network Analysis | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |
| 25 | Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of informetrics, 12(4), 1160-1177. | 1407(29) | 1240(25) | 1067(25) | Bibliometrics, Scientometrics & Research Integrity | Bibliology; Citation Analysis; Number | Scientometrics and Bibliometrics research |