Abstract
Journal quartiles derived from the journal citation reports are widely used for research evaluation, yet empirical evidence on their relationship with article-level normalized citation impact within specific disciplines remained limited. By examining this relationship using article-level indicators, the study explicitly addresses how journal quartiles function in institutional research evaluation practice, rather than as standalone bibliometric descriptors. This study analyzed 1,180 publications (2015–2024) from a research-intensive dental school to examine how journal quartile related to category normalized citation impact (CNCI). Descriptive analyses demonstrated a strong and orderly gradient in CNCI and raw citation counts from Q4 to Q1. Multivariable Gamma regression with log link and negative binomial models showed that quartile effects persist after adjusting for collaboration type, authorship, document type, and publication year. These findings aligned with cross-field scientometric evidence showing that higher-quartile journals attract disproportionate citation attention. The results extended prior journal-level analyses by showing a strong adjusted association between quartile and article-level normalized performance on aggregate. The study provided discipline-specific evidence relevant to institutional research strategy and publication planning. Future work could assess whether similar quartile gradients appear across other academic healthcare or biomedical subject areas.