From: Worldwide research productivity in emergency contraception: a bibliometric analysis
SCR | Author-Year | Title | Journal | Times cited |
---|---|---|---|---|
1st | Grimes et al. 1998 | Randomised controlled trial of levonorgestrel versus the Yuzpe regimen of combined oral contraceptives for emergency contraception | Lancet | 558 |
2nd | Von Hertzen, et al. 2002 | Low dose mifepristone and two regimens of levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: A WHO multicentre randomised trial | Lancet | 397 |
3rd | Glasier and Baird 1998 | The effects of self-administering emergency contraception | New England Journal of Medicine | 265 |
4th | Glasier et al. 1992 | Mifepristone (RU 486) compared with high-dose estrogen and progestogen for emergency postcoital contraception | New England Journal of Medicine | 213 |
5th | Piaggio et al. 1999 | Timing of emergency contraception with levonorgestrel or the Yuzpe regimen | Lancet | 210 |
6th | Raine et al. 2005 | Direct access to emergency contraception through pharmacies and effect on unintended pregnancy and STIs: A randomized controlled trial | Journal of the American Medical Association | 203 |
7th | Glasier 1997 | Emergency postcoital contraception | New England Journal of Medicine | 201 |
8th | Ho and Kwan 1993 | A prospective randomized comparison of levonorgestrel with the Yuzpe regimen in post-coital contraception | Human Reproduction | 200 |
9th | Von Hertzen, and Van Look 1999 | Comparison of three single doses of mifepristone as emergency contraception: A randomised trial | Lancet | 171 |
10th | Webb et al. 1992 | Comparison of Yuzpe regimen, danazol, and mifepristone (RU486) in oral postcoital contraception | British Medical Journal | 170 |