This study analyzes the scholarly landscape of data literacy through citation and co-citation analyses of documents, sources, and authors. Using Scopus data and VOSviewer, the study identifies significant contributions and thematic trends. A minimum criterion of 10 citations per document was applied, filtering the dataset to 205 documents, with a focus on 81 interlinked documents. Citation analysis covered document, source, and author metrics, while co-citation analysis examined cited authors, sources, and references. The study found 997 documents on data literacy, narrowed down to 205 significant ones, with 81 interlinked documents showing a high average citation rate. Key sources included the ACM International Conference Proceeding Series and Teachers College Record, and prominent authors like Ellen B. Mandinach and Kim Schildkamp emerged as central figures. Data literacy research spans fields like education, sociology, and information science, highlighting its interdisciplinary nature. The study's focus on citation metrics may introduce selection bias, emphasizing widely cited works. Future research could explore less-cited but influential works and broader datasets to mitigate biases. Policymakers can use these insights to integrate data literacy into educational curricula and design targeted professional development programs. Promoting interdisciplinary collaboration and supporting open access to scholarly literature can enhance data literacy initiatives. This study provides a comprehensive citation and co-citation analysis of data literacy research, offering valuable insights into key contributions and thematic trends, informing policy and practice, and underscoring the importance of data literacy in contemporary education and society.

Citation frequencies represent the most significant contributions in any respective field. This bibliometric analysis aimed to identify and analyze the 100 most-cited publications in the field of antibiotics and to highlight the trends of research in this field. “All databases” of Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science was used to identify and analyze the 100 publications. The articles were then cross-matched with Scopus and Google Scholar. The frequency of citation ranged from 940 to 11051 for the Web of Science, 1053 to 10740 for Scopus, and 1162 to 20041 for Google Scholar. Five hundred thirteen authors made contributions to the ranked list, and Robert E.W. Hancock contributed in six articles, which made it to the ranked list. Sixty-six scientific contributions originated from the United States of America. In contrast, five publications were linked to the University of Manitoba, Canada, that was identified as the educational organization, which made the most contributions (n=5). According to the methodological design, 26 of the most cited works were review-type closely followed by 23 expert opinions/perspectives. Eight articles were published in Nature journal, making it the journal with the most scientific contribution in this field. Correlation analysis between the publication age and citation frequency was found statistically significant (P = .012).

This article argues that despite a citation review is a rarely used research tool, this can be very useful to assess the impact of new research topics, both from the future research direction and the bibliometric perspectives. An explorative study is presented around the research area marked as Industry 4.0 with the conference paper mentioned in the title of this citation review. Even though the given reference paper is relatively recent, there are already twenty-seven citations listed among three different scholar databases. These are Google Scholar, ResearchGate and Semantic Scholar. In light of this, the article provides a bibliometric confirmation and analysis for the progression of the line of research adopted by de Giorgio et al. in the exploration of non-traditional methods using virtual reality technology and human-robot collaboration for adaptive applications in Industry 4.0. Furthermore, it represents a model for the authors’ self-development and an example of an unconventional approach to scientific work that may help improve related bibliometric research and scholar database strategies to index new articles and topics in the future.

In the recent decade, Building Information Modelling (BIM) has widely been adopted in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry and completely upended the way we build. While BIM continues gain momentum in the industry, it has also attracted increasing attentions from researchers. However, most of the current study focuses on reviewing BIM for management, BIM for green building, BIM for infrastructure and BIM for Facilities Management (FM). There are few studies about Global BIM review and to discuss their complex inter-connections. In this study, we adopted a scientometric analysis method to review global BIM research from 2004-2019. A total of 1455 scholarly bibliographic records obtained from Web of Science Core Collection databased were established for the analysis. This study has identified the top productive and influential researchers, research institutes, regions/countries, subject categories and journals in the BIM field. In addition, 11 clusters of Global BIM research were also identified including construction project, green BIM, construction safety planning, automated IFC-based workflow and so on. Authors distinguished 11 clusters of global BIM research into 3 stages, namely formulating stage, accelerating stage and transforming stage. Furthermore, authors reviewed the BIM policy of Singapore and observed there is a co-production relationship between evolution of BIM policy and global BIM research. These findings provide valuable information for researchers, practitioners and policy makers by visualizing the current progress in the research field of BIM and highlighting future research needs.

Recently, more and more countries are entering the global race for university competitiveness. On the one hand, global rankings are a convenient tool for quantitative analysis. On the other hand, their indicators are often difficult to quickly calculate, they often contradict each other. We thought about using widely available indicators for a quick analysis of the University's publication strategy. We opted for the normalized citation indicators available in SciVal analytical tool, i.e. Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). We have demonstrated the possibility of applying the correlation analysis to the impact indicators of a document and a journal on the sample of the social and humanitarian fields at Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. Particular attention was paid to the application of the results in practice.

Analyses of faculty citation activity usually focus on counts as a function of author characteristics such as rank, gender, previous citation levels, and other factors influencing productivity and career path. Citation analyses of publications consider aspects such as number of authors, author reputation, author order, length of the title, methodology, and impact factors of the publication. While publication topics or discipline are considered to be important factors, they are more difficult to analyze, and therefore performed less frequently. This paper attempts to do that for the field of urban planning. Urban planning is multi-disciplinary and includes consideration of social, economic, technological, environmental, and political systems that shape human settlement patterns. It has been suspected that some topics are more “popular” and have larger audiences, therefore are cited more often. Using nearly 15,000 urban planning publications, this paper presents an analysis of topics to assess which are cited most frequently. The classification of publications was performed using a Support Vector Machine (SVM), a machine learning (ML) approach to text classification, using citation data from Google Scholar. The citation levels for the resulting categories are analyzed and discussed.

Background: Research articles are essential for describing new ideas, techniques, and procedures and consolidating concepts. It creates an opportunity to expose studies and publicly assimilate published knowledge. Therefore, one of them is the most used and accepted index to verify the author’s scientific impact is the H-index or Hirsch index. It provides a robust single metric that combines quality and quantity. Therefore, it presents disadvantages, (1) researchers with shorter scientific carriers may have fewer articles and citations than those with longer scientific life; (2) it allows scientists to receive citations even if no new papers are published; (3) it is only useful for comparing the better scientists in a field; (4) this indicator can never decrease; (5) it is only weakly sensitive to the number of citations received; (6) the major and minor (or no) contributor in the research gained equal h-index. Then, the H-index ignores the total of citations and the time of a researcher's experience (“scientific age” [sa]). Objective: Thus, the goal of this study was to present a new index system (GFsa index ©) based on the two variables completely forgotten (total of citations and “scientific age”), introducing a new terminology “scientific age”, to evaluate the best-ranked researchers in Dentistry. Methods: The AD Scientific Index was used, and all researchers included in this study were cited in the AD Scientific Index (2024) in the Dentistry field and had the Google Scholar page accessible for a consultation to manually obtain the total of citations and calculate the “scientific age”. The information was retrieved by two authors (G.V.O.F. and J.C.H.F.), who assessed the data twice to avoid errors or mistakes. For inclusion: a minimum H-index value of 30; for exclusion: (i) the author did not have a Google Scholar page; (ii) duplicated author; or (iii) presented any suspicious activities about manipulation of articles. Then, a dataset of all researchers who were reported in Dentistry was prepared (name, H-index, i10 index, and publications). The formula developed and applied was GFsa=(total number of citations)/(“scientific age)². The Pearson correlation statistically evaluated the data obtained; the confidence interval was 95%. Results: A total of 9,093 researchers in Dentistry were recorded, of whom 1,020 were included. Then, we collected all 1,020 researchers' Google Scholar data (publications, citations, and indexes), and each researcher's total citations and “scientific age” were registered and calculated. The mean “scientific age” registered was 34.18 ± 13.34 (standard error of mean = 0.4181). With this information and data collected, GFsa index © was calculated, presenting a minimum value of 0.2186 and a maximum of 154.8 (mean = 10.33 ± 11.82; standard error of mean = 0.3706). Then, the data was organized and sorted following the ranking obtained in the GFsa index ©. The Pearson correlation showed that the H-index had a weakly positive association with the researcher’s “scientific age”; this fact means that the H-index will increase according to the “scientific age” increase. Otherwise, a moderately negative correlation between GFsa and “scientific age” was demonstrated, whereby a higher GFsa © had a lower “Scientific age”. This assessment shows that the variables introduced were fairly used. Moreover, a positive correlation was observed between both indexes (H-index and GFsa). Conclusion: It is possible to conclude that the new variable reported (“Scientific age”) and using the total citations brought a fairer and more feasible evaluation among the researchers. Thus, we are launching the new GFsa index © and the new information named “Scientific age” for the first time in the literature. The future perspective of the GFsa © application will be (1) the evaluation of the 9,093 researchers in Dentistry (total initially registered), including more authors/researchers in the Dentistry field, (2) expanding the exposition of this new index for other areas of the knowledge, and (3) provide free access of all data through the website (http://gfindex.us.to).

Engineers make things, make things work, and make things work better and easier. This kind of knowledge is crucial for innovation, and much of the explicit knowledge developed by engineers is embodied in scientific publications. In this paper, we analyze the evolution of publications and citations in Engineering in a middle-income country such as Mexico. Using a database of all Mexican publications in Web of Science from 2004 to 2017, we explore the characteristics of publications that tend to have the greatest impact; this is the highest number of citations. Among the variables studied are the type of collaboration (no collaboration, domestic, bilateral, or multilateral), the number of coauthors and countries, the language of the article, controlling for a coauthor from the USA and the affiliation institution of the Mexican author(s). Our results emphasize the overall importance of joint international efforts and suggest that publications with the highest number of citations are those with multinational collaboration (coauthors from three or more countries), written in English, and when one of the coauthors is from the USA.

This bibliometric review is aimed to analyze the top 100 most-cited publications in dentistry and to compare its outcomes with similar analysis done by Feijoo et al., [1]. A literature search was performed using the Elsevier's Scopus without any restriction of language, publication year or study design. Of 336381 articles, the top 100 were included based on their citation count which ranged from 638 to 4728 citations (Feijoo et al., 326 to 2050). Most productive decade was the 2000s with 40 articles on the list (Feijoo et al., 1980s: 26). Marx RE (7%) was the major contributor in this study (Feijoo et al., Socransky SS: 9%) and a whopping 48% articles generated from the USA. 26% of top 100 articles focused periodontology (Feijoo et al., periodontology: 43%), while 17% of the total were published in the Journal of Dental Research (Feijoo et al., Journal of Clinical Periodontology: 20%). Most of the publications were narrative reviews/expert opinion (36%), (Feijoo et al., case series: 22%) and were within the evidence level V (64%) (Feijoo et al., 54%). The citation count that a paper secures is not necessarily a reflection of research's quality, however, the current analysis provides latest citation trends in dentistry.

Based on the total scholarly article output of Norway, we investigated the coverage and degree of openness according to three bibliographic services 1) Google Scholar, 2) oaDOI by Impact Story and 3) 1findr by 1science. According to Google Scholar, we find that more than 70% of all Norwegian articles are openly available. However, degrees are profoundly lower according to oaDOI and 1findr, respectively 31% and 52%. Varying degrees are mainly caused by different interpretations of openness, with oaDOI being most restrictive. Furthermore, open shares vary considerably by discipline, with the Medcine and Health sciences at the upper and the Humanities at the lower end. We also determined the citation frequencies using Cited-by values as of Google Scholar, applying year and subject normalization. We find a significant citation advantage for open articles. However, this is not the case for all types of openness. In fact, the category Open Access journals was by far lowest cited, indicating that young journals with a declared open access policy still lack recognition.

Manual review of the extensive literature covering nutrition-based lifestyle interventions to promote healthy cognitive ageing has proved educative, however, data-driven techniques can better account for the large size of the literature (tens of thousands of potentially relevant publications to date) and interdisciplinary nature of where relevant publications may be found. In this study we present a new way to map the literature landscape focusing on nutrition-based lifestyle interventions to promote healthy cognitive ageing. We applied a combination of citation network analysis and text mining to map out the existing literature on nutritional interventions and cognitive health. Results indicated five overarching clusters of publications, which could be further deconstructed into a total of 35 clusters. These could be broadly distinguished by focus on lifespan stages (e.g. infancy versus older age), and specificity regarding nutrition (e.g. narrow focus on iodine deficiency versus broad focus on weight gain). Rather than concentrating into a single cluster, interventions were present throughout the majority of the research. We conclude that a data-driven map of the nutritional intervention literature can benefit the design of future interventions, by highlighting topics and themes that could be synthesized across currently disconnected clusters of publications.

A toy model for the distribution of the impact factor (IF) of a journal is proposed. The model demonstrates the presence of a heavy tail for the IF distribution, which occurs due to some random non-scientific circumstances. Therefore, the use of IF as an indicator of the quality of scientific papers seems to be inadequate.

The evaluation of research proposals and academic careers is subject to indicators of scientific productivity. Citations are critical signs of impact for researchers, and many indicators are based on these data. The literature shows that there are differences in citation patterns between areas. The scope and depth that these differences may have to motivate the extension of these studies considering types of articles and age groups of researchers. In this work, we conducted an exploratory study to elucidate what evidence there is about the existence of these differences in citation patterns. To perform this study, we collected historical data from Scopus. Analyzing these data, we evaluate if there are measurable differences in citation patterns. This study shows that there are evident differences in citation patterns between areas, types of publications, and age groups of researchers that may be relevant when carrying out researchers’ academic evaluation.

The article's purpose is a citation analysis of the impact of scientific publications by authors of different gender compositions. The PageRank method was chosen to calculate the citation impact of scientific publications, and the citation has also estimated the impact of scientific publications based on the number of citations. The normalized citation impact of scientific publications is calculated according to nine subsets of scientific publications that correspond to patterns of different gender compositions of authors. Also, these estimates were calculated for each country with which the authors of the publications are affiliated. The Citation database was chosen for the scientometric analysis Network Dataset ( ver . 13). The dataset includes more than 5 million scientific publications and 48 million citations. The main subject areas of scientific publications in this database are computer science, artificial intelligence, mathematics, engineering, etc. The results indicate that articles with a predominantly male composition are cited more than articles with a mixed or female composition of authors in this direction. Analysis of advantages in dynamics indicates that in the last decade for developed countries, there has been a decrease in the connection between the citation impact of scientific publications and the gender composition of their authors. However, the obtained results still confirm the presence of gender inequality in science, which may be related to socioeconomic and cultural characteristics, natural homophily, and other factors that contribute to the appearance of gender gaps. An essential consequence of overcoming these gaps, including in science, is ensuring the rights of people in all their diversity.

The authors introduce the GRASS GIS add-on module g.citation as an initial implementation of a fine-grained software citation concept. The module extends the existing citation capabilities of GRASS GIS, which until now only provide for automated citation of the software project as a whole, authored by the GRASS Development Team, without reference to individual persons. The functionalities of the new module enable individual code citation for each of the over 500 implemented functionalities, including add-on modules. Three different classes of citation output are provided in a variety human- and machine-readable formats. The implications of this reference implementation of scientific software citation for both for the GRASS GIS project and the OSGeo foundation are outlined.

Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) is widely used to understand the complex connections between different components. This study presents a bibliometric overview of ISM research with a focus on its linkages to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the impact of COVID-19. The study analyzed 1988 publications on ISM published between 2012 and 2021, of which 1202 were directly mapped to the SDG and 59 were related to COVID-19. The study identified key authors, institutions, countries, and journals involved in the research and their linkages to the SDG. The results showed that ISM research is strongly linked to SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure). We also identified influential SDG based on centrality measures like betweenness and eigenvector. The top four countries contributing to ISM publications were India, China, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The most frequently cited journals were Benchmarking: An International Journal, Sustainability, Journal of Modelling in Management, and Journal of Cleaner Production. Four main clusters were identified in the ISM research, including (1) integration with AHP & Fuzzy Logic for promoting sustainability alignment, (2) ISM-based strategy development for various stakeholders, (3) ISM-based decision-making in various fields, and (4) ISM-based risk evaluation. For the first time studies that used ISM approach to understand the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 were identified and their key findings were discussed. The study also identified several emerging topics for future ISM research, such as blockchain & IoT, environmental management systems, climate change adaptation, smart cities, and humanitarian logistics and their potential linkages to SDG.

Archaeology is often argued to provide a unique long-term perspective on humans that can be utilised for effective policy-making, for example in discussions of resilience and sustainability. However, the specific archaeological evidence for resilient/sustainable systems is rarely explored, with these terms used simply to describe a community that survived a particular shock. In this study, a set of 74 case studies of papers discussing archaeological evidence for resilience/sustainability are identified and analysed using bibliometric methods. Variables from the papers are also quantified to assess patterns and provide a review of current knowledge. A great variety of scales of analysis, case study locations, stressors, resilient/sustainable characteristics, and archaeological evidence types are present. Climate change was the most cited stressor (n=40) and strategies relating to natural resources were common across case studies, especially subsistence adaptations (n=35), other solutions to subsistence deficiencies (n=23), and water management (n=23). Resilient/sustainable characteristics were often in direct contrast to one-another, suggesting the combination of factors is more important than each factor taken individually. Further quantification of well-defined variables within a formally-produced framework is required to extract greater value from archaeological case studies of resilience/sustainability.

The impact of scientific articles is often measured using metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and CiteScore, which rely on citation counts and publication volume. In this study, we aimed to identify the predictors of article impact in the leading solid organ transplantation journals from 2019 to 2020. Article impact was determined using its citation count in 2021 compared to the JIF. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics to identify significant predictors of positive impact on the JIF. A total of 2,461 articles and reviews were included, with variations observed among the top transplantation journals. Factors such as the number of authors, open access publishing, and authors from top affiliations were found to significantly influence the impact of articles. Articles discussing kidney transplantation and COVID-19 were associated with a positive impact on the JIF, while those discussing lung transplantation had a negative impact. The findings suggest that collaborative research with more authors and involvement of top institutions enhances impact. Open access publishing also correlated with increased citations and a positive impact on the JIF. Further research incorporating a broader range of journals and years would provide a more comprehensive understanding of factors influencing article impact.

Using the h-index to assess individual researchers is not only unethical and unfair but also inaccurate and misleading. This index fails to offer a reliable measure of a researcher's impact based on their citation scores. Beyond statistical and conceptual considerations, authorship practices, especially in the case of multi-authored publications, give rise to significant problems that often go unnoticed. While some modifications of the h-index have been proposed to mitigate these weaknesses, the fundamental deficiencies persist. Most of these flaws have been effectively addressed by the c-score, a composite citation index. The c-score excludes self-citations, normalizes the number of citations by considering the number of authors in each paper, and takes into account first, single, and last authorship. This approach provides a more realistic measure of the impact of each individual researcher based on raw citations.

This study aims to estimate the scientific productivity of collective subjects. The objective is to build a method for evaluating scientific productivity that allows calculating productivity, including for new collective subjects with a small citation network—the paper purposes the Time-Weighted PageRank method with citation intensity (TWPR-CI). The Citation Network Dataset (ver. 13) has been analyzed to verify the method. The dataset includes more than 5 million scientific publications and 48 million citations. There have been allocated four classes of collective subjects (more than 27,000 collective subjects in total). For each class, scientific productivity estimates from 2000 to 2021 were calculated using the PageRank, Time-Weighted PageRank, and TWPR-CI methods. It is shown that the advantage of the TWPR-CI method is the higher sensitivity of the scientific productivity estimates for new collective subjects on average during the first ten years of observation. At the same time, the assessment of scientific productivity for other collective subjects according to this method is stable. However, the small citation network of the new collective subjects does not allow an adequate assessment of scientific productivity during the first years of its operation. Therefore, the TWPR-CI method can be used to assess the scientific productivity of collective subjects, in particular the productivity of new ones.

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the scholarly footprint of ChatGPT, an AI language model, using bibliometric and scientometric methods. The study aims to understand the evolution of research output, citation patterns, collaborative networks, application domains, and future research directions related to ChatGPT. By analyzing data from the Scopus database, 533 relevant articles were identified for analysis. The findings reveal the prominent publication venues, influential authors, and countries contributing to ChatGPT research. Collaborative networks among researchers and institutions are visualized, highlighting patterns of co-authorship. The application domains of ChatGPT, such as customer support and content generation, are examined. Moreover, the study identifies emerging keywords and potential research areas for future exploration. The methodology employed includes data extraction, bibliometric analysis using various indicators, and visualization techniques such as Sankey diagrams. The analysis provides valuable insights into ChatGPT's influence in academia and offers researchers guidance for further advancements. This study stimulates discussions, collaborations and innovations to enhance ChatGPT's capabilities and impact across domains.

Barry Turner’s 1978 Man-made Disasters and Charles Perrow’s 1984 Normal Accidents were seminal books but a detailed comparison has yet to be undertaken. Doing so is important to establish content and priority of key ideas underpinning contemporary safety science. Turner’s research found socio-technical and systemic patterns that meant that major organisational disasters could be foreseen and were preventable. Perrow’s macro-structuralist industry focus was on technologically deterministic but unpredictable and unpreventable ‘system’ accidents, particularly rare catastrophes. Andrew Hopkins and Nick Pidgeon respectively suggested that some prominent writers who wrote after Turner may not have been aware of, or didn’t properly acknowledge, Turner’s work. Normal Accidents didn’t cite Turner in 1984 or 1999. Using a methodology involving systematic reading and historical, biographical and thematic theory analysis, a detailed review of Turner’s and Perrow’s backgrounds and publications sheds new light on Turner’s priority and accomplishment, highlighting substantial similarities as well as clear differences. In a previously unpublished letter, Perrow confirmed reading Man-made Disasters while writing Normal Accidents. Turner became better known after a 1997 second edition but under-acknowledgment issues continued. Ethical citation and potential reasons for under-acknowledgment are discussed. It is concluded that Turner’s foundational importance for safety science should be better recognised.

Research investigating the neural substrates underpinning parental behaviour has recently gained momentum. Particularly, the hypothalamic medial preoptic area (MPOA) has been identified as a crucial region for parenting. The current study conducted a scientometric analysis of publications from 01 January 1972 to 19 January 2021 using CiteSpace software to determine trends in the scientific literature exploring the relationship between MPOA and parental behaviour. In total, 677 scientific papers were analysed, producing a network of 1509 nodes and 5498 links. Four major clusters were identified: "C-Fos Expression'', "Lactating Rat'', "Medial Preoptic Area Interaction'' and "Parental Behavior''. Their content suggests an initial trend in which the properties of the MPOA in response to parental behavior were studied, followed by a growing attention towards the presence of a brain network, including the reward circuits, regulating such behavior. Furthermore, while attention was initially directed uniquely to maternal behavior, it has recently been extended to the understanding of paternal behaviors as well. Finally, although the majority of the studies were conducted on rodents, recent publications broaden the implications of previous documents to human parental behavior, giving insight into the mechanisms underlying postpartum depression. Potential directions in future works were also discussed.

Ocean big data is the scientific practice of using big data technology in the marine field. Data from satellites, manned spacecraft, space stations, airship, unmanned aerial vehicles, shore-based radar and observation stations, exploration platforms, buoys, underwater gliders, submersibles, and submarine observation networks are seamlessly combined into the ocean’s big data. Increasing numbers of scholars have tried to fully analyze the ocean’s big data. To explore the key research technology knowledge graphs related to ocean big data, articles between 1990 and 2020 were collected from the “Web of Science”. By comparing bibliometric software and using the visualization software Cite-Space, the pivotal literature related to ocean big data, as well as countries, institutions, categories, and keywords, were visualized and recognized. Journal co-citation analysis networks can help determine the national distribution of core journals. Co-citation analysis networks for documents show authors who are influential at key technical levels. Key co-occurrence analysis network keywords can determine research hot spots and research frontiers. The three supporting elements of marine big data research are shown in the co-citation network. These elements are author, institution, and country. By examining the co-occurrence of keywords, the key technology research directions for future marine big data were determined.

The growth rate in academic and scientific publications increased very fast. Researchers must choose a good representative and significant literature in publications, which has become challenging worldwide. Usually, the paper citation number indicates this paper's potential influence and importance. However, this standard metric of citation numbers cannot be used as a measurement to judge the popularity and significance of the recently published papers. To address this challenge, this paper presents an effective prediction method called FutureCite to predict the future citation level of research articles. FutureCite combines machine learning with text and graph mining techniques, leveraging their abilities in classification, datasets in-depth analysis, and feature extraction. FutureCite aims to predict future citation levels of research articles applying a multilabel classification approach. FutureCite can extract significant semantic features and capture the interconnection relationships found in scientific articles during feature extraction using textual content, citation networks, and metadata as feature resources. Our goal is to contribute to the advancement of substantial effective approaches impacting the citation counts in scientific publications by enhancing the precision of future citations. We conducted several experiments using a comprehensive publication dataset to evaluate our method and determine the impact of using a variety of machine learning algorithms. FutureCite demonstrated its robustness and efficiency and showed promising results based on different evaluation metrics. Using the FutureCite model has significant implications in improving the researchers' ability to determine targeted literature for their research and better understand the potential impact of research publications.