The fifty most cited Latin-American articles in the orthopaedic literature

Upper Extremity Trauma in Costa Rica - Evaluating Epidemiology and Identifying Opportunities

Background

Traffic accidents and musculoskeletal injuries represent a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Costa Rica. To inform capacity building efforts, we conducted a survey study of hand and upper extremity (UE) fellowship-trained surgeons in Costa Rica to evaluate the epidemiology, complications, and challenges in care of UE trauma.

Methods

Aiming to capture all hand and UE trained surgeons in Costa Rica, we compiled a list of nine surgeons and sent a survey in Spanish using Qualtrics. Assessment questions were developed to understand the burden, complications, practice patterns, challenges, and capacity associated with care of UE trauma. Questions were designed to focus on opportunities for future investigation. Questions were translated and adapted by two bilingual speakers. Data were reported descriptively and open-ended responses were analyzed using content analysis.

Results

Nine (100%) surgeons completed the survey. Distal radius fractures, hand and finger fractures, and tendon injuries are the most frequently noted conditions. Stiffness and infection are the most common complications. About 29% of patients are unable to get necessary therapy and 13% do not return for follow-up care with monetary, distance, and transportation limitations being the greatest challenges.

Conclusions

The burden of UE trauma in Costa Rica is high. Identifying common conditions, complications, challenges, and capacity allows for a tailored approach to partnership and capacity building (e.g. directing capacity building and/or research infrastructure toward distal radius fractures). These insights represent opportunities to inform community-driven care improvement and research initiatives, such as Delphi consensus approaches to identify priorities or the development of outcome measurement systems.

Barriers to and Outcomes of Initiating Clinical Research at Two Trauma Centers in Mexico

INTRODUCTION

Despite efforts to advance clinical research through collaboration between Latin and North American partners, there remains persistent barriers to performing investigative work. To overcome these obstacles, a team of over 100 surgeon-leaders from 18 Latin American countries founded the Asociación de Cirujanos Traumatólogos de las Américas (ACTUAR). One of ACTUAR's first major collaborative projects, initiated in 2018, was a prospective, observational, multicenter study evaluating quality of life after open tibia fracture management. The current study identified common barriers experienced during the initiation of this study, as exemplified through two sites in Mexico. The study aims to identify obstacles to proactively overcome these in future collaborative work.

METHODS

Two research assistants from University of California, San Francisco and two research coordinators from Mexico were recruited to share their experiences, identify common barriers experienced during site enrollment and on-boarding for the ACTUAR open tibia study, and discuss possible solutions.

RESULTS

Barriers were organized into three categories: structural, logistical, and intrapersonal. Structural barriers included differences in patient populations and resources between private and public hospitals. Logistical barriers included ambiguous ethical review processes, internet availability, and low patient follow-up. Primary enrollment as a resident responsibility led to some intrapersonal barriers. Potential solutions were identified for each barrier and agreed upon by all collaborators.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple barriers were identified by research personnel who initiated a prospective surgical clinical research study in Mexico. Through collaborative approaches, many potential solutions may help overcome these barriers and build locally led research capacity in Latin America.

Scientometric analysis of Indian Orthopaedic Research in the last two decades

PURPOSE

This study aimed to examine India's orthopaedic research output during 2002-2021 to analyze the research characteristics and publication performances of leading organizations, authors, and cities, the core journals publishing research, broad subject areas, sub-specialties, and the classification by anatomical location, the subject areas of research using major keywords and the sources of funding and the extent of international collaboration.

METHODS

India's orthopaedic publications data was identified and downloaded from the Scopus database ( https://www.scopus.com ) using a well-defined search strategy and keywords.

RESULTS

India's 4606 publications grew at a 20.8% annual growth rate and averaged 11.3 citations per paper. The 10.4% and 16.3% share of India's papers received external funded support and were involved in international collaboration. The USA and UK (31.8% and 21.3%) represent the highest collaborative share in India's international collaborative publications. AIIMS-New Delhi and PGIMER-Chandigarh produced a larger proportion of articles (5.2% and 4.3%) among contributing organizations. In terms of authors, R. Vaishya and S. Rajasekaran are the most productive ones, contributing 1.6% and 1.1% share respectively. Clinical studies, paediatric sub-specialty, and knee & leg anatomical location accounted for the largest share of papers (32.2%, 10.8%, and 7.5%).The most frequent keywords co-occurrences were "Orthopaedic Surgery," "Hydroxyapatite," "Biocompatibility," "Orthopaedic Procedures," "Bone," "Surgical Techniques," "Biomaterials," and "Osteosynthesis."

CONCLUSION

This study revealed the characteristics and trends of research and core publications from Indian authors and organizations identified in the last two decades. This research should provide useful insights into the research hotspots of India in the present, past, and future.

Orthopaedic Trauma Research Priorities in Latin America: Developing Consensus Through a Modified Delphi Approach

BACKGROUND

Despite a substantial burden of musculoskeletal injury, orthopaedic trauma studies in Latin America are lacking. The purpose of the present study was to identify research priorities among orthopaedic trauma surgeons in Latin America.

METHODS

Research questions were solicited from members of the Asociación de Cirujanos Traumatólogos de las Américas. Participants rated questions by importance from 1 to 9. All questions were redistributed with an aggregate rating, and participants rerated questions with knowledge of group responses.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight participants completed the first survey and were included in subsequent surveys. The mean age was 51.8 years, and most participants were male (92%), had completed an orthopaedic trauma fellowship (60.3%), and participated in research (80.8%). Seventeen countries were represented; 5 respondents were from a high-income country, 67 were from an upper middle-income country, and 6 were from a lower middle-income country. Sixty-five questions were identified. Six questions were rated from 1 to 3 ("more important") by >70% of participants: (1) What is the optimal treatment protocol for elderly patients with hip fracture? (2) What is the most effective initial and definitive management of musculoskeletal injury, including timing and surgical strategy, for the polytraumatized patient? (3) What is the ideal state of open fracture treatment, including timeliness and method of antibiotics, debridement, surgical fixation, and closure or coverage, at each hospital level in the health-care system? (4) What patient and fracture characteristics predict infection after musculoskeletal injury? (5) What is the current state of treatment for fracture-related infection, including timeliness and method of antibiotics and surgical intervention, at each hospital level in the health-care system? (6) What is the optimal protocol for temporary management for the hemodynamically unstable patient with a pelvic or acetabular fracture?

CONCLUSIONS

This modified Delphi study of orthopaedic trauma surgeons in Latin America identified geriatric hip fractures, polytrauma, open fractures, musculoskeletal infection, and pelvic and acetabular fractures as top research priorities. This information is important for resource allocation and goal setting for orthopaedic trauma in the region.

Leadership development for orthopaedic trauma surgeons in Latin America: opportunities for and barriers to skill acquisition

Introduction

There is growing interest in leadership courses for physicians. Few opportunities are available in global regions with limited resources. This study describes orthopaedic trauma surgeons' desired leadership skill acquisition, opportunities, and barriers to course participation in Latin America.

Methods

Latin American orthopaedic trauma surgeons from the Asociación de Cirujanos Traumatólogos de las Americas (ACTUAR) network were surveyed. This survey solicited and gauged the surgeons' level of interest in leadership topics and their relative importance utilizing a 5-point Likert-scale. Additionally, comparisons were calculated between middle-income countries (MICs) and high-income countries (HICs) to ascertain if needs were different between groups. The survey included demographic information, nationality, level of training, years in practice, leadership position, needs assessment, and perceived barriers for leadership educational opportunities.

Results

One hundred forty-four orthopaedic surgeons completed the survey, representing 18 countries across Latin America; 15 MICs and 3 HICs. Participants had more than 20 years in practice (49%) and held leadership positions (81%) in hospital settings (62%), national orthopaedic societies (45%), and/or clinical settings (40%). Sixty-three percent had never attended a leadership course due to lack of opportunities/invitations (69%), difficulty missing work (24%), and costs (21%). Ninety-seven percent expressed interest in attending a leadership course. No difference in needs was determined between respondents from MICs and HICs. Professional Ethics, Crisis Management/Organizational Change Management, and High Performing Team-Building were identified as the most important leadership topics.

Conclusion

Orthopaedic surgeons in Latin America demonstrate an interest in acquiring additional leadership skills but have few opportunities. Identifying interests, knowledge gaps, and core competencies can guide the development of such opportunities.

Brazilian authors don't cite Brazilian authors: Nothing has changed since 1994

Objective  To outline the profile of self-citations from Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Rev Bras Ortop) and citations of this journal in other medical orthopaedic journals with general or specific content in a knowledge area of the specialty.

Methods  This is an observational cross-sectional study of the frequency of self-citations and citations from Rev Bras Ortop in five other medical orthopaedic journals from different countries, all published in English. The last 15 articles published in 2020 in each of the six journals were analyzed. The references used in each of them were evaluated to identify the journal in which they were originally published. The frequency of distribution of the four main journals cited, their position, and the relative percentage to the total number of citations were observed and recorded in each of the six journals. The number of times that the Rev Bras Ortop was cited in each of the selected foreign journals was assessed using its absolute and relative frequencies.

Results  The total number of citations evaluated in this study was 2,527 (ranging from 386 to 486 per magazine). Rev Bras Ortop showed a low rate of self-citation (2.6%), being the sixth journal cited in the journal itself (10 out of a total of 386 references). Moreover, Rev Bras Ortop was not mentioned in any of the other five medical journals included in the study (absolute frequency 0, relative frequency 0).

Conclusion  Rev Bras Ortop has a low reference of itself, with a self-citation rate of 2.6% in the studied period, showing that the Brazilian orthopaedic surgeons do not mention the Brazilian orthopaedic surgeon who publishes in the journal. We suggest the elaboration and implementation of strong strategies to improve the journal's visibility in the world academic-scientific scenario. In addition, it is essential that Brazilian orthopaedic surgeons understand this reality and assist directly and effectively to change this scenario.

Bibliometric evaluation of orthopaedics and traumatology publications from France: 20-year trends (1998-2017) and international positioning

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the scientific publication output for individual countries and medical specialties. The contribution of French authors to the currently expanding volume of publications on orthopaedics and traumatology (OT) is unclear. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR) is an English-language version of a preexisting French journal that was launched in 2009 to increase the dissemination of research done in France. The objective of this study was to use Web of Science (WoS) data from 1998 to 2017 to determine (i) the contribution of OT publications to the total worldwide volume of scientific publications, (ii) the contribution of OT publications from France to the total worldwide volume of OT publications, and (iii) changes over time in the proportion of OT publications from France with special attention to potential effects of the creation of OTSR.

HYPOTHESIS

The proportion of OT publications from France increased after 2010-2012, indicating a positive effect of OTSR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

WoS data were used to identify original studies and review articles written by at least one French author, published between 1998 and 2017, and dealing with OT (defined as orthopaedics and/or traumatology in adult and/or paediatric patients). The worldwide volumes of publications in OT and other specialties were compared. Within worldwide OT publications, the proportion from France was determined. Indicators of impact were evaluated during successive 5-year periods. Finally, the position of OT in worldwide research was assessed and OT journals were analysed.

RESULTS

Among worldwide scientific medical publications, the proportion dealing with OT increased year on year from 1.93% in 1998 to 2.65% in 2017. Among annual publications from France, the proportion dealing with OT rose similarly, from 1.32% to 2.40%. Over the 20-year study period, France moved from the sixth to the ninth position, chiefly due to a large increase in publications from Asia. However, France remained in third position among European countries and increased its OT production 3-fold between 1998 and 2017. The proportion of OT articles from France that ranked among the top 1% most cited articles increased by 65% from 2008-2012 (20 articles) to 2013-2017 (33 articles), and the proportion in the top 10% increased by 31.8% (211 in 2008-2012 and 278 in 2013-2017). This rate of progression was faster than in any of the other western countries. Between 1998-2011 and 2012-2017, the contribution of French OT to publication output showed a 1.56-fold greater increase than did the contribution of OT to the worldwide volume of scientific medical publications.

DISCUSSION

OT publications from France have kept pace with the steady increase seen worldwide over the last 20years. Although the US and UK remain in the lead, and despite the considerable growth in the output of Asian countries, France occupies a prominent position on the international OT scene. The creation of OTSR has elevated the international profile of French OT centres.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study with no control group.

Publication output of French orthopedic and trauma surgeons: Quantitative and qualitative bibliometric analysis of their scientific production in orthopedics and other medical fields

INTRODUCTION

Bibliometric analysis is being used more and more in orthopedics and traumatology. However, the quantity and quality of publications authored by French orthopedic and trauma surgeons outside their discipline have never been analyzed, nor has the change in the quality of orthopedics publications. This led us to carry out a bibliometric analysis to answer the following questions: 1) How has the quantity of scientific production by French orthopedists changed over the past 10 years? 2) How has the quality of the overall scientific production by French orthopedists changed over the past 10 years?

HYPOTHESIS

From 2008 to 2017, the production of French orthopedists has increased in quantity and quality in orthopedics and other medical fields.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The analysis was performed by cross-referencing the list of SOFCOT (French Society for Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology) members with the French SIGAPS database and the InCites platform. Out of 3979 SOFCOT members, 972 (24%) had authored publications during this period and were included in the analysis. Several indicators were analyzed: number of publications; SIGAPS score (production quality) for the various Web of Science (WoS) categories; number and percentage of publications in the top 1% and top 10% (most highly cited articles worldwide).

RESULTS

The "Orthopedics" discipline was still the most prevalent with 68% of all publications identified. The "Surgery" discipline was stable, and the share of publications had increased in five other disciplines: Sports Sciences, Clinical Neurology, Emergency Medicine, Engineering-Biomedical and Material Science-Biomaterials. Of the 727 journals indexed in PubMed in which at least one author is a French orthopedic or trauma surgeon, 79 journals (11%) had at least 10 articles authored by a French orthopedists, making up 4680/6056 published articles (77%) during the study period. The highest SIGAPS score was in the "Orthopedics" discipline followed by "Surgery", and then by "Sport Sciences" with a large number of publications in the SIGAPS B category. Publications in "Orthopedics" category A and B journals increased 14% during this period. When all disciplines are pooled, the share of publications in SIGAPS A, B and C categories increased by 10% from 2008 to 2017. The largest increase in publications for categories A and B and the top 1% and 10% was in "Sports Sciences".

DISCUSSION

Over the past 10 years, French orthopedists have continued to increase their scientific production in the orthopedics field and in related fields such as Sport Sciences, Clinical Neurology and Biomedical Engineering. The quality of the scientific production of French orthopedists in their discipline and outside of it has greatly improved, as evidenced by the shift toward SIGAPS A and B journals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study without control group.

Top 100 Most-Cited Clinical Studies of Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: The Foundation of Practice

Total number of citations has been considered a proxy for a published study's importance within a given field. However, there are multiple pitfalls to correlating the total number of citations alone with the quality of a study. In this review, the authors aimed to identify the top 100 most-cited studies of hip and knee arthroplasty and then assess study design and quality of reporting. More than half of these studies were level IV evidence, unblinded, not randomized, and not controlled. This underscores the need for higher-quality study design to support practice. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(2):e151-e161.].

Asociación de Cirujanos Traumatólogos de las Américas: Development of a Latin American Research Consortium

Trauma continues to be a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in lower to middle-income countries. To meet the ever-growing need of musculoskeletal care in trauma patients, orthopaedic surgeons play an instrumental role in providing care, guided by relevant clinical research studies. Promoting research and publishing results are both crucial to influencing trauma-related skeletal injury treatment in lower to middle-income countries. Currently, few opportunities exist for trauma surgeons in Latin America to participate in clinical research or to contribute to academic publications, thereby limiting their ability to address potentially critical treatment questions faced by their specific patient populations. In response to these obstacles, in 2017, a group of 60 surgeon leaders representing 18 countries throughout Latin America developed the Asociación de Cirujanos Traumatólogos de las Américas (ACTUAR; www.actuarla.org). The ACTUAR supports investigative opportunities for Latin American orthopaedic trauma surgeons who want to contribute through collaborative research work. This pioneering initiative aims to improve trauma-related research, clinical care, and health care policies through the development of an international network across the Americas.

Barriers to Clinical Research in Latin America

Enhancing health research capacity in developing countries is a global health priority. Understanding the orthopedic burden of disease in Latin America will require close partnership between more-developed and less-developed countries. To this end, the Osteosynthesis and Trauma Care Foundation assembled a research consortium of Latin-American orthopedic leaders. Prior to the meeting, we surveyed attendees on perceived barriers to conducting research at their institutions. During the event, working groups discussed these barriers, developed strategies for addressing them, and planned future steps for collaboration. The participants established the need for global relationships that allow colleagues from Latin America to access to training and established investigational infrastructure of North American centers to address research questions relevant to their communities. As a result of the discussion, the International Orthopaedic Multicenter Study (INORMUS) in Fracture Care was initiated. Since then, an expanded international working group, Associación de Cirujanos Traumatológicos en las Americas (ACTUAR), has been created with the purpose of promoting increased global partnership for research capacity development.

The 50 Most-cited Articles in Gastroenterology and Hepatology from Mainland China

OBJECTIVE

To identify and analyze the 50 most-cited gastroenterology and hepatology articles originating from mainland China.

METHODS

We utilized the 2015 edition of Journal Citation Reports and PubMed to determine the 50 most-cited gastroenterology and hepatology articles from 75 professional journals and four leading journals in clinical medicine, which are The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and The British Medical Journal. Then we excluded the articles written outside mainland China and collected the basic information, including the title, authors, year of publication, source journal, city, institution, number of citations, and topic of the research.

RESULTS

The number of citations for the top 50 papers ranged from 279 to 89 (mean, 129). These articles were published between 2005 and 2012, in which 2009 was the year with the largest number of highly cited papers(13). All articles were published in 15 journals. The journal Hepatology published the largest number of articles(21), followed by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology(4), Journal of Hepatology(4) and World Journal of Gastroenterology(4). The top 50 articles originated mainly from Shanghai(20), Guangzhou(13) and Beijing(6). Sun Yat-sen University produced most highly cited papers(10). The number of basic research was far more than clinical research, of which the ratio was about 1.78(32:18). In all these articles, hepatocellular carcinoma was the most-discussed topic(19), followed by hepatitis B virus(8) and endoscopic(5).

CONCLUSIONS

Although a large gap remains between mainland China and the global community, the gastroenterology and hepatology research from China is gradually recognized by the world.

The fifty most cited Italian articles in the orthopaedic literature

PURPOSES

It is widely known that in Orthopaedics, as in each specialty, the academic influence of an article is also determined by the number of times the article is cited. The aim of this study was to identify the 50 most frequently cited Italian orthopaedics journal articles and to analyse the characteristics that might have made them more citable.

METHODS

Science Citation Index Expanded was searched for the 50 most frequently cited Italian orthopaedics journal articles between 1988 and 2013 in the subject category "Orthopaedics".

RESULTS

The 50 most frequently cited articles were all published in English and were published in 12 of the 67 journals in the subject category "Orthopaedics" in the Institute for Scientific Information Web Science (Thomson Reuters, New York, New York, USA). One half of the articles were published before 2000 and the other half later. The number of citations ranged from 423 of the first article (mean citation/years 21.15) to 83 of the fiftieth (mean citation/years 16.60). The articles were all categorized under orthopaedic field, but each of them spanned from orthopaedics to a specific sub-specialty. The majority was clinical articles (n = 39), and the most common fields were sport orthopaedic surgery (including arthroscopy and cartilage) (n = 19) and biomechanics (n = 12).

CONCLUSIONS

This list of 50 most frequently cited Italian articles is, to our knowledge, significantly important for the general orthopaedic scientific community, particularly for the Italian orthopaedic community. Researchers and doctors may use this work to make their future publications more influential and citable.