Publishing trends in Journal of Paediatric Surgery, Pediatric Surgery International and European Journal of Pediatric Surgery over the past three decades

Scientific Output by Latin American Women in Pediatric Surgical Sciences Over the Past 11 Years: A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This academic article discusses the historical underrepresentation of female in science, with a focus on Latin America. It highlights the importance of both technical and non-technical skills in the medical-surgical field, particularly the role of research skills. The study aims to quantify and characterize the scientific output of Latin American female researchers over the past decade, providing insights into the challenges and opportunities in low and middle-income countries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional bibliometric study was conducted in 2023, focusing on pediatric surgical science journals in Scopus and PubMed. It assessed Latin American female participation, journal details, and interaction networks, using SPSS and Gephi software. The period analyzed was from January 2012 to December 2022.

RESULTS

Between 2012 and 2022, 727 articles with Latin authorship in pediatric surgery were analyzed across 304 journals. Of these, 63.69% had female co-authors. The majority were original articles (53.13%), with contributions from Brazil, Mexico, and Chile. Notable journals included the Journal of Pediatric Surgery and Child's Nervous System. Keywords like Laparoscopy and Cardiac surgery were common. A growth trend in female Latin American publications was observed, despite temporary declines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights a growing trend in Latin American females' scientific contributions to pediatric surgery from 2012 to 2022, although a gender gap persists. The research mainly consists of primary data studies, with a focus on Brazil and Mexico from public institutions. The Journal of Pediatric Surgery featured prominently, and common topics included Laparoscopy, Cardiac surgery, Liver transplant, Congenital heart defects, and COVID-19.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A Comparison of Plastic Surgery Authorship Trends Under Single Versus Double-Blinded Review

INTRODUCTION

Research is key to academic advancement in plastic surgery. However, access to publication opportunities may be inequitable as seen in other fields. We compared authorship trends of plastic surgery manuscripts that underwent single-blinded review (SBR) versus double-blinded review (DBR) to identify potential disparities in publication opportunities.

METHODS

Publications from two plastic surgery journals using SBR and two using DBR from September 2019 to September 2021 were evaluated. Name and institution of the article's first and senior author and journal's editor-in-chief (EIC) were recorded. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact analyses were used to compare author characteristics between SBR and DBR articles.

RESULTS

Of 2500 manuscripts, 65.7% underwent SBR and 34.3% underwent DBR. SBR articles had higher percentages of women as first authors (31.9% versus 24.3%, P < 0.001) but lower percentages of first (50.7% versus 71.2%, P < 0.001) and senior (49.6% versus 70.3%, P < 0.001) authors from international institutions. First (26.0% versus 12.9%, P < 0.001) and senior (27.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.007) authors of SBR articles tended to have more plastic surgery National Institutes of Health funding. Journals using SBR tended to have higher rates of authorship by EICs or authors sharing institutions with the EIC (P ≤ 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

While associated with greater female first authorship suggesting potential efforts toward gender equity in academia, SBR of plastic surgery articles tends to favor authors from institutions with higher National Institutes of Health funding and disadvantage authors from international or lower-resourced programs. Careful consideration of current peer-review proceedings may make publication opportunities more equitable.

Research and Publication Trends in Pediatric Surgery in Latin America: A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis from 2012 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric surgery is a developing specialty with increasing volume in Latin America. However, the research and scientific activity trends carried out in this region in recent years are unknown. This study aimed to analyze and visualize Latin American research in pediatric surgery from 2012 to 2021.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Bibliometric cross-sectional study of scientific articles on pediatric surgery published by Latin American authors from 2012 to 2021 in Scopus was performed. Statistical and visual analysis was performed with R programming language and VOS viewer.

RESULTS

449 articles were found. Observational studies (44.7%; n = 201), case reports (20.4%; n = 92) and narrative reviews (11.4%; n = 51) were found to be the most common study designs. The published articles were predominantly monocentric (73.1%; n = 328), only 17% (n = 76) involved authors from 2 or more countries, and mostly there was no collaboration with high-income countries (80.6%; n = 362). The Journal of Pediatric Surgery was the journal with the highest volume of articles published (n = 37). The most used terms were Laparoscopy, Complications, and Liver Transplantation, and the countries with the highest number of articles published were Brazil and Argentina.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a progressive increase in the scientific activity of Latin authors in pediatric surgery from 2012 to 2021. The evidence produced was mainly from observational studies and case reports, predominantly conducted in Brazil. Multinational and international collaboration was low; the most frequent topics of interest were laparoscopy and minimally invasive surgery.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

IV.

UK paediatric surgical academic output (2005-2020): A cause for concern?

BACKGROUND

The publication record can be regarded as a key metric of the academic output of a craft surgical speciality with an almost exponential increase in the number of such publications worldwide over the past 20 years (Ashfaq et al. J Surg Res 2018;229:10-11). We aimed to examine and explore if this was the experience within UK paediatric surgery centres.

METHODS

The academic search engine Scopus™ (Elsevier) was used to track every paediatric surgeon's (NHS or University) publication history between Jan. 2005 - Dec. 2020. This was validated by an algorithmic search of PubMed™. The h-index (citations/publication), considered a validated metric of career academic output, was also calculated for each individual surgeon. A Field-Weighted Citation Index (Scopus™) (FWCI) was used to assess impact of individual publications. Textbooks, book chapters, abstracts, duplications ("double dipping") and output attributed to UK BAPS-CASS national studies were excluded. Some output(s), not considered as relevant to "paediatric surgery", was edited. Data are quoted as median(range).

RESULTS

During this 16-year period, there were 3838 publications identified from 26 centres with a "top ten" listing of those paediatric surgical units contributing over half the output (n = 2189, 57%). To look for evidence of trend(s) we analysed the output from these surgical centres in two 5-year periods (2005-9 and 2015-19) and showed an overall fall in output(s) - [730 (53.4%) to 645 (46.4%)] with 6/10 (60%) ' top ten ' centres here recording a reduction in publications. The median h-index of the 232 contributing paediatric surgical consultants was 12 (range 1-56). The best performing publication from the "top ten" centres had 96.5(51-442) citations with the FWCI being 4.5 (2.2 - 30.2).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights current paediatric surgery publication output metrics in UK centres. There is evidence of a relative reduction in outputs overall which is a cause for concern for the future, although individual publications from the 10 most active units in the UK remain highly cited. These findings may serve purpose in several ways: (i) UK paediatric surgical centre rankings may be helpful for guiding residency / trainee application; (ii) surgical research funding for the top performing units may be better facilitated and finally (iii) UK centres showing a ' fertile ground ' for nurturing and training paediatric surgeons with academic aspirations could be useful for future workforce planning.

Shifting paradigms: The top 100 most disruptive papers in core pediatric surgery journals

INTRODUCTION

The disruption score is a new bibliometric tool that has recently been utilized to identify studies that are innovative and shift paradigms. We sought to identify and characterize the top 100 most disruptive publications in pediatric surgery.

METHODS

The 100 most disruptive and cited publications in 17 pediatric surgery journals were identified from a validated dataset and linked with the iCite NIH tool. The top 100 most disruptive publications were reviewed to determine study design, clinical focus, and perceived contribution.

RESULTS

The publications included in the top 100 list were more disruptive than 99.5% of the entire PubMed universe. Journal of Pediatric Surgery (n = 45) had the most articles included. There was a weak correlation between citation count and disruption score (r = 0.27). Retrospective cohort studies (38%), contributions in clinical outcomes (39%), technical/technological innovations (31%), clinical focus in trauma (18%), and disorders of the gastrointestinal tract (18%) were the most represented. The disruption score identified a unique subset of literature that has created new paradigms with long lasting influence and may be further applied as another tool to measure scientific impact. This wide array of literature highlights both technical and technological innovations as well as key moments in the history of pediatric surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V.

Adipose Tissue-derived Stem cells in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: A Bibliometric Study

BACKGROUND

Due to the evolving nature of the applications of adipose tissue-derived stem cells (ADSCs) and the rapidly growing body of scientific literature, it is difficult to generate a manual compilation and systematic review of ADSCs in plastic and reconstructive surgery.

METHODS

Bibliographic records were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection and analyzed with CiteSpace.

RESULTS

We retrieved 691 publications and their references. We identified 52 research categories. Interdisciplinary studies were common. The journals clustered into 13 subnetworks. The top institutions were Stanford University; University of Pittsburgh; University of Tokyo; University of California, Los Angeles; University of California, Davis; New York University; Tulane University; and University of Michigan. National Institutes of Health and National Natural Science Foundation of China provided the most generous financial support. Studies clustered into 22 topics. Emerging trends may include improvement of fat grafting, and application of ADSCs in wound healing, scleroderma, and facial rejuvenation.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides a panoramic view of ADSCs in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Analysis of journals, institutions, and grants could help researchers in different ways. Researchers may consider the emerging trends when deciding the direction of their study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Publication Trends and Global Collaborations on Esophageal Atresia Research: A Bibliometric Study

INTRODUCTION

 Research on esophageal atresia (EA) has been heavily published over the past decades. Herein, we aimed to study the quantity and quality as well as key topics in EA research with regards to global collaborations among countries and authors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 Publications on EA from 1945 to 2018 were extracted from the Web of Science core collection database. Productivity (quantity) was assessed by the number of publications. Quality was estimated from the number of citations, citation rate per item and year, h-index, and impact index. Collaborative networks were evaluated using VOSviewer. All measures were analyzed for countries, authors, and journals. The 10 most cited original articles between 1969 and 2018 in 5-year intervals (n = 100) were manually screened to assess the key points of EA research.

RESULTS

 A total of 2,170 publications from 85 countries published in 388 journals were identified yielding 26,755 citations, both significantly increasing over time (p < 0.001). The most productive countries and authors also accounted for high-quality publications and benefited from an active global network. The most productive journals derived from the field of pediatric surgery but accounted only for one-third of EA papers. The best cited journals were unspecific for pediatric surgery. Long-term outcome remained the most important topic in EA research, followed by surgical techniques, epidemiology, associated anomalies, perioperative complications, and postnatal management. In contrast, basic science was underrepresented.

CONCLUSION

 Over the past seven decades, EA publications increased tremendously. Productiveness and quality benefited from global networking. Long-term outcome remains the key interest of EA research.

Bibliometric Analysis of Research Studies Based on Federally Funded Children's Health Surveys

OBJECTIVE

Bibliometric analyses are commonly used to measure the productivity of researchers or institutions but rarely used to assess the scientific contribution of national surveys/datasets. We applied bibliometric methods to quantify the contributions of the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH) and the National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs (NS-CSHCN) to the body of pediatric health-related research. We also examined dissemination to nonresearch audiences by analyzing media coverage of statistics and research produced from the surveys.

METHODS

We conducted a search of the Web of Science database to identify peer-reviewed articles related to the NSCH and NS-CSHCN published between 2002 and 2019. We summarized information about citation counts, publishing journals, key research areas, and institutions using the surveys. We used the Lexis Advance database Nexis to assess media coverage.

RESULTS

The publication set included 716 NSCH/NS-CSHCN journal articles published between 2002 and June 2019. These publications have in turn been cited 22,449 times, including in 1614 review articles. Over 180 journals have published NSCH/NS-CSHCN articles, and the most commonly covered research areas are in pediatrics; public, environmental and occupational health; psychology; and health care sciences and services. Over 500 institutions have used NSCH/NS-CSHCN data to publish journal articles, and over 950 news media articles have cited statistics or research produced by the surveys.

CONCLUSIONS

NSCH/NS-CSHCN data are widely used by government, academic, and media institutions. Bibliometric methods provide a systematic approach to quantify and describe the contributions to the scientific literature made possible with these data.

Levels of evidence and journal impact factor in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a 15-year follow-up

This study was performed to assess changes over time in the quality of research in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) by examining the level of evidence of published articles. A secondary aim was to determine the relationship of the journal impact factor to these levels of evidence. The four major OMS journals with an impact factor were assessed. Articles published in 2017 and 2018 were categorized based on their level of evidence, and their correlation with the 2019 journal impact factor was investigated using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (rho). The total number of published articles increased by a factor of 2.4 over a 15-year period, from 932 in 2002-2003 to 2253 in 2017-2018. The percentage of articles increased by 1.0% for level I evidence, 3.4% for level II, 8.2% for level III, and 4.1% for level IV. Non-evidence articles reduced by 16.7%. All journals showed an increase in impact factor, and a significant correlation was noted between the proportion of published higher-level evidence articles and the impact factor over time (rho=0.811, P=0.001). It is concluded that OMS journals currently display a higher proportion of good quality articles leading to a better impact factor than 15 years ago.

Assessing the Gap in Female Authorship in Neurosurgery Literature: A 20-Year Analysis of Sex Trends in Authorship

BACKGROUND

Publications are considered a major factor for advancement in academia. An effort has been made to study authorship trends in neurosurgery publications. The objective of this study was to investigate authorship trends in the neurosurgery literature for the last 20 years (1998-2018).

METHODS

Articles for the years 1998, 2008, and 2018 were extracted from Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery, and World Neurosurgery for this retrospective study. Only original articles, case reports, and review articles were included. The gender of the first, senior, and corresponding author was determined. Subspecialty topic, type of paper, geographic origin of articles, and the number of citations for each article were also collected.

RESULTS

A total of 3912 articles were included. The number of articles, the total number of authors, and nonexperimental studies increased in the successive decades. A total of 744 women (19.0%) were first authors and 520 (13.3%) were senior authors of their respective publications. A decreasing trend (P < 0.05) was noted between female first authors and male senior authors over time. All 3 journals showed an increasing pattern of female authorships across the 2 decades.

CONCLUSIONS

A rapid rise in female authorship positions in particular and authorship positions in general demonstrates the diversity that is slowly burgeoning to cater to perspectives and issues that require a multidimensional approach in neurosurgery. Increasing linkages among researchers in neurosurgery on a global scale are evident by the increase in multinational collaborations. Expansive efforts are needed at institutional and individual levels to eradicate sex-based pitfalls that hinder excellence in neurosurgery research.

The pediatric surgery match by the numbers: Defining the successful application

BACKGROUND

Pediatric surgery remains the most competitive general surgery subspecialty. The authors suspected significant inflation in academic metrics since the last published paper. This study aimed to identify factors associated with applicant success in the match.

METHODS

After IRB approval, all applications to a single accredited pediatric surgery fellowship program were reviewed for match years 2014-2018. Matched and unmatched applicants were compared in an unadjusted and adjusted analysis.

RESULTS

This training program received 414 of 425 total applications (97%). Match results were available for 388 (94%). Matched applicants were more likely to train in programs with pediatric surgery fellowships (64% vs. 28%) and to have dedicated research time (55% vs. 21%; all p < 0.01). Matched applicants had more total publications (median: 12 vs. 7, p < 0.01) and higher ABSITE scores (median: 64th vs. 59th percentile, p < 0.01). Training in multiple programs negatively impacted the chance to match (p < 0.01). The median number of publications per applicant increased over the study time period from 7 to 11 (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The likelihood of matching into a pediatric surgery fellowship was related to the type of residency attended, dedicated research time, ABSITE scores, and number of publications. Overall, the total number of publications reported by all applicants increased.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective Comparative Study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Pediatric Surgical Research Output in Germany in the Last 30 Years - An Assessment and International Comparison of Three Dedicated Paediatric Surgical Journals

Purpose: Research output of once-leading countries in surgical journals is decreasing despite an overall increase of scientific publications by 8% per year. We aimed to assess research outputs of German, Dutch, and Israeli pediatric surgeons in dedicated pediatric surgical journals in order to get insight into trends in pediatric surgical research. Methods: We collected bibliographic information on all original articles in the Journal of Pediatric Surgery, European Journal of Pediatric Surgery, and Pediatric Surgery International in 1985-1988, 2000-2003, and 2015-2018 that had a German, Dutch or Israeli last author from a department of pediatric surgery. Citation counts were obtained from the Web of Science. Results: Research output of German pediatric surgery decreased from 19 manuscripts in 1988 (0.1/surgeon/year) to eight manuscripts in 2017 (0.02/surgeon/year), whereas those of the Netherlands increased from two manuscripts in 1985 (0.08/surgeon/year) to 12 manuscripts in 2016 (0.3/surgeon/year). The declining German research output negatively correlated with increasing numbers of specialist pediatric surgeons for total (τ = -0.54; P = 0.0156) and manuscripts per surgeon (τ = -0.79; P = 0.0001), resulting in a negative trend over time (χ² = 11.845, P = 0.0006). Analyses of citation patterns revealed that manuscripts by Dutch pediatric surgeons and those published in the Journal of Pediatric Surgery had higher absolute citation counts than the reference category of a German manuscript in the European Journal of Pediatric Surgery. Age-corrected citation rates resembled this result by increasing from 2000 to 2003 ( x ˜ = 0.799, range: 0-3.368) to 2015-2018 ( x ˜ = 2, range: 0-5) (P = 0.035) for the Netherlands. Assessment of manuscript types revealed that the proportion of prospective studies increased in the German sample (χ² = 5.05, P = 0.0246), but remained the lowest among the comparators. Surprisingly, the proportion of non-clinical manuscripts from Germany also increased over time (χ² = 4.001, P = 0.0455), whereas it remained constant in both the Netherlands and Israel. Conclusion: German pediatric surgical research output decreased in the last thirty years based on the sample of dedicated pediatric surgical journals, while Dutch productivity increased. Citation rates-as a measure of scientific impact-were associated and increased with Dutch manuscripts. The involved factors remain to be determined and whether this represents a shift toward other journals or mirrors a general development.

Trends in Gender Authorship and Collaborations: A 30-Year Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Manuscripts from The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery and The Bone and Joint Journal

Publishing original peer-reviewed research is essential for advancement through all career stages. Fewer women than men hold senior-level positions in academic medicine and, therefore, examining publication trends relative to gender is important. The goal of this study was to examine and compare publication trends in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) and The Bone and Joint Journal (BJJ) with a particular emphasis on trends regarding author gender. Data was collected and analyzed for manuscripts published in JBJS and BJJ over the past 30 years. For manuscripts published in 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016, we recorded the numbers of authors, manuscript pages, references, collaborating institutions, the position in the byline of the corresponding author, the country of the corresponding author, and the names of the first and corresponding author. We also calculated the normalized number of citations and corresponding author position. The number of authors, institutions, and countries collaborating on manuscripts published in both JBJS and BJJ increased over time. JBJS published more manuscripts from North America and BJJ published more manuscripts from Europe. In both journals, the percentage of women as first and/or corresponding author increased over time. Trends over the past 30 years have shown increased collaborations with greater citations in manuscripts published in JBJS and BJJ. In the same time period, both journals demonstrated a rise in the percentage of manuscripts with women first and/or corresponding authors, suggesting a decrease in the gender gap.