Does knowledge have a half-life? An observational study analyzing the use of older citations in medical and scientific publications

ObjectivesIn the process of scientific progress, prior evidence is both relied on and supplanted by new discoveries. We use the term ‘knowledge half-life’ to refer to the phenomenon in which older knowledge is discounted in favour of newer research. By quantifying the knowledge half-life, we sought to determine whether research published in more recent years is preferentially cited over older research in medical and scientific articles.DesignAn observational study employing a directed, systematic search of current literature.Data sourcesBMJ, PNAS, JAMA, NEJM, The Annals of Internal Medicine, The Lancet, Science and Nature were searched.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesEight high-impact medical and scientific journals were sampled examining original research articles from the first issue of every year over a 25-year span (1996–2020). The outcome of interest was the difference between the publication year of the article and references cited, termed ‘citation lag’.Data extraction and synthesisAnalysis of variance was used to identify significant differences in citation lag.ResultsA total of 726 articles and 17 895 references were included with a mean citation lag of 7.5±8.4 years. Across all journals, >70% of references had been published within 10 years of the citing article. Approximately 15%–20% of referenced articles were 10–19 years old, and articles more than 20 years old were cited infrequently. Medical journals articles had references with significantly shorter citation lags compared with general science journals (p≤0.01). Articles published before 2009 had references with significantly shorter citation lags compared with those published in 2010–2020 (p