Authorship Trends in 30 Years of the Journal of Arthroplasty

Louis G, Bondar KJ, Sudah SY, D’Apuzzo M. Characteristics and Trends of the Most Cited Publications in The Journal of Arthroplasty

Background

This study aims to identify the most frequently cited articles published in the Journal of Arthroplasty (JOA) and to analyze the trends in the content and contributors of the literature within the journal.

Methods

The 100 most cited articles published in the JOA were accessed using the Scopus database. The number of citations, year of publication, level of evidence (LOE), article type, country of origin, and contributing institution were each recorded for each article.

Results

The United States (63%) was the most prolific publishing nation. The 1990s (30%) and 2000s (47%) were the most productive decades. The most common article category was clinical outcomes (33%), followed by technical note (16%) and biomechanics (14%). The plurality of the top 100 articles were well-designed case-control or cohort studies of LOE II (46%) followed by LOE V (32%) and LOE I (11%).

Conclusions

Using citation analysis, the most influential articles in the JOA were comprehensively and objectively analyzed. The most popular fields of research involved clinical outcomes (33%) and technical note (16%), both of which increase an article’s likelihood of being highly cited. Knowledge of the most influential articles in the JOA allows for appreciation of current and potential future areas of literature regarding diagnosis, management, and outcome of a patient undergoing arthroplasty.

Middle East Authors' Contribution to the Journal of Arthroplasty’s Publications in the Past 20 years (2000–2020)

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Diversity in Plastic Surgery Authorship: A 14-Year Analysis of 2688 Articles Published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

BACKGROUND

Publication in peer-reviewed journals is a duty and privilege. It is essential to the advancement of evidence-based medicine and often used as a proxy for academic achievement, contributing to decisions around promotion in academia. Within plastic surgery, authors have historically been male surgeons affiliated with academic institutions, lacking representation of women, private practice, medical students, and international collaboration. This study analyzes differences in authors' gender, practice affiliation, degree of education, and international collaboration in articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, which was chosen as the representative journal given its high impact factor (3.946) and consistent ranking as the number one journal in plastic surgery worldwide.

METHODS

A list of Breast, Cosmetic, and Hand/Peripheral Nerve articles published between 2006 and 2019 was compiled from the online archive of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Demographic author characteristics were recorded, and statistical analyses were performed to identify trends over time.

RESULTS

A total of 2688 articles were analyzed. The proportion of articles written by female authors in the Breast category, authors in private practice with academic affiliation in the Cosmetic section, and U.S. collaboration with other countries increased over time (p = 0.038, p = 0.029, p < 0.001, respectively). First authors with bachelor's, master's, and doctorate degrees have also been contributing increasingly.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis revealed increasing demographic heterogeneity of authors in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery over time, with increasing contributions from women, surgeons in private practice with academic affiliation, medical students, and international collaborations. The Journal is capturing contributions from an increasingly diverse authorship, consistent with the changing demographics of plastic surgeons.

Significant increase in quantity and quality of knee arthroplasty related research in KSSTA over the past 15 years

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate both publication and authorship characteristics in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy journal (KSSTA) regarding knee arthroplasty over the past 15 years.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles published in KSSTA between January 1, 2006, and December 31st, 2020, utilising the search term 'knee arthroplasty'. 1288 articles met the inclusion criteria. The articles were evaluated using the following criteria: type of article, type of study, main topic and special topic, use of patient-reported outcome scores, number of references and citations, level of evidence (LOE), number of authors, gender of the first author and continent of origin. Three time intervals were compared: 2006-2010, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020.

RESULTS

Between 2016 and 2020, publications peaked at 670 articles (52%) compared with 465 (36%) published between 2011 and 2016 and 153 articles (12%) between 2006 and 2010. While percentage of reviews (2006-2010: 0% vs. 2011-2015: 5% vs. 2016-2020: 5%) and meta-analyses (1% vs. 6% vs. 5%) increased, fewer case reports were published (13% vs. 3% vs. 1%) (p < 0.001). Interest in navigation and computer-assisted surgery decreased, whereas interest in perioperative management, robotic and individualized surgery increased over time (p < 0.001). There was an increasing number of references [26 (2-73) vs. 30 (2-158) vs. 31 (1-143), p < 0.001] while number of citations decreased [30 (0-188) vs. 22 (0-264) vs. 6 (0-106), p < 0.001]. LOE showed no significant changes (p = 0.439). The number of authors increased between each time interval (p < 0.001), while the percentage of female authors was comparable between first and last interval (p = 0.252). Europe published significantly fewer articles over time (56% vs. 47% vs. 52%), whereas the number of articles from Asia increased (35% vs. 45% vs. 37%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Increasing interest in the field of knee arthroplasty-related surgery arose within the last 15 years in KSSTA. The investigated topics showed a significant trend towards the latest techniques at each time interval. With rising number of authors, the part of female first authors also increased-but not significantly. Furthermore, publishing characteristics showed an increasing number of publications from Asia and a slightly decreasing number in Europe.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A comprehensive analysis of authorship trends in Skeletal Radiology since inception from 1976 to 2020

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to explore authorship trends within the musculoskeletal radiology subspecialty-focused journal, Skeletal Radiology, from inception to 2020.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Skeletal Radiology articles published in 1976, 1986, 1996, 2006, 2016, and 2020 were reviewed. For each article, the number of authors, the number of distinct institutions, the names of first and last authors, the country of the first author, the article length, and the number of article references were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 885 articles passed the exclusion criteria to be included in the study. Since inception, there has been a significant increase in the number of SR articles published (P = 0.02), the mean number of authors per article (P < 0.01), the mean number of references per article (P < 0.01), the mean number of distinct institutions per article (P = 0.02), and the mean number of pages per article (P < 0.01). The proportion of female first and last authors significantly increased (P = 0.02, P = 0.02). There was a significant increase in the proportion of articles published from Asia (P = 0.04). However, no significant changes in the proportion of articles published from other regions were observed.

CONCLUSION

Similar to authorship trends in other medical journals, Skeletal Radiology demonstrated upward trends in authorship count, distinct institutional count, and article length. A rise in first and last female authorship was observed. Finally, an increase in the proportion of authors from Asia was observed while no significant changes in the proportion of authors from other regions were demonstrated.

Authorship trends in the Egyptian orthopedic journal (from 2012 to 2020), as an example of a specialized Egyptian medical journals

Background

Authorship trends in medical journals were studied in many disciplines, mostly in western countries' journals. We aimed at studying the authorship trends in the Egyptian Orthopaedic Journal as an example of a specialized Egyptian medical journal.

Results

A total of 397 articles were eligible for analysis. The mean number of authors per article was 2 ± 1 (range from 1 to 6), 161 (40.6%) articles were single authorship. The degree of the first author was reported in 305 (76.6%), the first author carried an M.D. degree in 302 (99%) articles, and in three (1%), the first author carried a master’s degree. No authors with a bachelor's degree were reported. Forty-two institutions contributed to the publications, 14 (33.3%) international and 28 (66.7%) Egyptian national institutions. In 368 (92.7%) articles, all the authors were from the same institution, and 29 (7.3%) articles were published as a cooperation between different institutions with a mean 1.1 ± 0.3 institution per article. International contribution to the journal was found in 21 (5.3%) articles. The orthopedic department from Cairo university was the most contributing department to the journal publications.

Conclusions

The old trend of single authorship prevails in the journal publications with a notable deficiency in young researchers’ contribution to the journal and low incidence of international contribution and poor national institution cooperation.

Improving the reproducibility of findings by updating research methodology

The literature discusses causes of low reproducibility of scientific publications. Our article adds another main cause—uncritical adherence to accepted research procedures. This is evident in: (1) anachronistically requiring researchers to base themselves on theoretical background even if the studies cited were not tested for reproducibility; (2) conducting studies suffering from a novelty effect bias; (3) forcing researchers who use data mining methods and field-based theory, with no preliminary theoretical rationale, to present a theoretical background that allegedly guided their work—as a precondition for publication of their findings. It is possible to increase research validity in relation to the above problems by the following means: (1) Conducting a longitudinal study on the same participants and only on them; (2) Trying to shorten the time period between laboratory experiments and those on humans, based on cost–benefit considerations, anchored in ethical norms; (3) Reporting the theoretical background in a causal modular format; (4) Giving incentives to those who meet the above criteria while moderating the pressure for fast output.

Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years

Publication and authorship are important in academia for career advancement, obtaining grants, and improved patient care. There has been a recent interest in bibliometric changes over time, especially regarding the gender gap. The purpose of this study was to explore bibliometric changes in the musculoskeletal literature. Bibliometric variables (number of authors, institutions, countries, pages, references, corresponding author position, author gender, geographic region of origin, and editorial board makeup) were analyzed for 5 basic science and 12 clinically oriented musculoskeletal journals from 1985 through 2016. Statistical analyses comprised bivariate analyses, multifactorial ANOVAs, and logistic regression analyses. A p < 0.005 was considered significant. Nearly, all variables increased over time. Asia had the highest number of authors and corresponding author positions, Australia/New Zealand the highest number of institutions and references, North America the highest number of pages, and Europe the highest number of countries. Those with a female first author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Likewise, those with a female corresponding author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Single-authored manuscripts decreased over time. The percentage of female first authors rose from 10.8% in 1985-1987 to 23.7% in 2015-2016. There were more female 1^st authors in the basic science journals compared to the clinical journals (33.2% vs. 12.7%). Single-authored manuscripts were more likely to be written by males (5.1 vs. 2.4%) and decreased over time. The many differences by geographic region of origin likely reflect different socio/cultural attitudes regarding academia and research, as well as the gender composition of the disciplines by geographic region. Overall, there has been an increase in the number of female 1^st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.

The Impact of Hospital/University Affiliation on Research Productivity Among US-Based Authors in the Fields of Trauma, Surgical Critical Care, Acute Care, and Emergency General Surgery

BACKGROUND

Research productivity is critical to academic surgery and essential for advancing surgical knowledge and evidence-based practice. We aim to determine if surgeon affiliation with top US universities/hospitals (TOPS) is associated with increased research productivity measured by numbers of peer-reviewed publications in PubMed (PMIDs).

METHODS

A bibliometric analysis was performed for PMIDs. Affiliated authors who published in trauma surgery (TS), surgical critical care (SCC), acute care surgery (ACS), and emergency general surgery (EGS) were evaluated for publications between 2015 and 2019, and lifetime productivity. Our analysis included 3443 authors from 443 different institutions. Our main outcome was PMIDs of first author (FA) and senior author (SA) in each field (2015-2019) and total lifetime publications.

RESULTS

Significant differences exist between PMIDs from TOPS vs non-TOPS in FA-TS (1.34 vs 1.23, P = .001), SA-TS (1.71 vs 1.46, P < .001), total SA-PMIDs (44.10 vs 26.61, P < .001), and SA-lifetime PMIDs (90.55 vs 59.03, P < .001). There were no significant differences in PMIDs for FA or SA-SCC, FA or SA-ACS, FA or SA-EGS, FA-total PMIDs 2015-2019, or FA-lifetime PMIDs (P > .05 for all).

CONCLUSION

There were significantly higher TS PMIDs among FAs and SAs affiliated with top US institutions in 2015-2019, along with higher total PMIDs (2015-2019) and lifetime PMIDs. These findings are of significance to future graduate medical applicants and academic surgeons who need to make decisions about training and future career opportunities.

Comparative analysis of authorship trends in the Journal of Hand Surgery European and American volumes: A bibliometric analysis

Background

The purpose of this study was to better understand the authorship publishing trends in the field of hand surgery. To accomplish this, a comparative analysis was completed between the European and American volumes of the Journal of Hand Surgery (JHSE and JHSA) over the past three decades. Well-established bibliometric methods were used to examine one representative year from each of the past three decades. The focus of the study was to examine changes in author gender over time as well as to compare authorship trends across the two volumes.

Materials and methods

All JHSA and JHSE publications from 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015 were placed into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Data was collected for each publication including the gender of first and corresponding authors, corresponding author position, corresponding author country of origin, number of credited institutions, authors, printed pages, and references. Countries were grouped by regions.

Results

A total of 450 and 763 manuscripts from JHSE and JHSA, respectively, met inclusion criteria. JHSE and JHSA both showed increases in most variables analyzed over time. Both journals showed an increase in female first and corresponding authors. JHSE and JHSA displayed a rise in collaboration between institutions and countries.

Conclusions

Both JHSE and JHSA display increasing female inclusion in the hand surgery literature, which has traditionally been a male dominated field. The observed increase in collaboration between institutions and countries is likely linked to advances in technology that allow sharing of information more conveniently and reliably than was previously possible. As further advances are made socially and technologically, hopefully these trends will continue, leading to faster and higher quality research being generated in the field of hand surgery.

•

Orthopaedic hand literature has seen increases in collaboration over the past 30 years.

•

Significant increase in female first authors in the orthopaedic hand literature.

•

Female first and corresponding author manuscripts received the most citations.

The Proportion of Abstracts Presented at the 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting Ultimately Published

As attendees of orthopedic meetings consider how to integrate presented information into their practice, it is helpful to consider the quality of the data presented. One surrogate metric is the proportion of and changes to presented abstracts that become journal publications. With this study, using the 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Annual Meeting abstracts, the authors sought to answer the following questions: Did the publications following abstract presentations differ in terms of the conclusions, study subjects, or coauthors? What proportion of abstracts was published? What are the most common subtopics and journals, and what is the most common author country? Keywords and authors from the 2010 AAOS Annual Meeting proceedings program (698 podium and 548 poster abstracts) were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. If a publication resulted, differences in the conclusion, number of study subjects, and authorship between the abstract and the journal publication were tabulated. The proportion of abstracts published, specialty subtopics, authorship country, and journals of publication were collected. At journal publication, 1.7% of podium and 1.7% of poster conclusions changed. Mean number of authors for podium and poster increased significantly (P<.001), and 30% of podium and 44% of poster had a change in the number of study subjects. The overall journal publication percentage was 61% (68% podium and 53% poster). The majority of the authors were from the United States. The most common journal was The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. It is important to evaluate the usefulness and clinical applicability of meetings, especially the final disposition of conference abstracts, from various angles to ensure that they are as worthwhile and educational as possible. [Orthopedics. 2020;xx(x):xx-xx.].

Authorship growth in contemporary medical literature

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to investigate authorship trends among publications in high-impact, peer-reviewed specialty journals published within the last decade and to assess how publication practices differ among medical specialties.

METHODS

The National Institutes of Health's Portfolio Analysis platform, iCite, was queried for PubMed-indexed case reports, review articles, and original research articles published between 2005 and 2017 in 69 high-impact, clinical journals encompassing 23 medical specialties. Overall, 121,397 peer-reviewed publications were evaluated-of which, 45.1% were original research, 28.7% were review articles, and 26.3% were case reports. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the magnitude of association of publication year on the number of authors per article by specialty and article type.

RESULTS

Original research articles have the greatest increase in authorship (0.23 more authors per article per year), as compared with review articles (0.18 authors per article per year) and case reports (0.01 authors per article per year). Twenty-two of the 23 specialties evaluated had increase in authorship in high-impact specialty journals. Specialty growth rates ranged from 0.42 authors/year (Neurology), Psychiatry (0.35 authors/year), General Surgery (0.29 authors/year), Urology (0.27 authors/year), and Pathology (0.27 authors/year). Specialties with a greater percentage of graduates entering academics had more authors per article; surgical specialties and length of residency were not found to be predictive factors.

CONCLUSION

There has been substantial growth in the authorship bylines of contemporary medical literature, much of which cannot be explained by increased complexity or collaboration alone.

Bibliometric and authorship trends over a 30 year publication history in two representative US sports medicine journals

Bibliometric studies are important to understand changes and improvement opportunities in academia. This study compared bibliometric trends for two major sports medicine/arthroscopy journals, the American Journal of Sports Medicine® (AJSM®) and Arthroscopy® over the past 30 years. Trends over time and comparisons between both journals were noted for common bibliometric variables (number of authors, references, pages, citations, and corresponding author position) as well as author gender and continental origin. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed. A p < 0.001 was considered statistically significant. One representative year per decade was used. There were 814 manuscripts from AJSM® and 650 from Arthroscopy®. For AJSM® the number of manuscripts steadily increased from 86 in 1986 to 350 in 2016; for Arthroscopy® the number of manuscripts increased from 73 in 1985/1986, to 267 in 2006, but then dropped to 229 in 2016. There were significant increases in all bibliometric variables, except for the number of citations which decreased in Arthroscopy®. There were significant differences in manuscript region of origin by journal (p = 0.000002). Arthroscopy® had a greater percentage of manuscripts from Asia than AJSM® (19.3% vs 11.5%) while AJSM® had a greater percentage from North America (70.3% vs 59.2%); both journals had similar percentages from Europe (18.2% for AJSM® and 21.6% for Arthroscopy®). For AJSM® the average percentage of female first authors was 13.3%, increasing from 4.7% in 1986 to 19.3% in 2016; the average percentage of female corresponding authors was 7.3%. For Arthroscopy®, the average percentage of female first authors was 8.1%, increasing from 2.8% in 1985/1986 to 15.7% in 2016 (p = 0.00007). In conclusion, AJSM® and Arthroscopy® showed an increase in most variables analyzed. Although Arthroscopy® is climbing at a higher rate than AJSM® for female authors, AJSM® has an overall greater percentage of female authors.

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

The aim of this study was an analysis of the changing publication trends over the last three decades in the Journal of Pediatric Surgery (JPS), Pediatric Surgery International (PSI) and European Journal of Pediatric Surgery (EJPS) by studying the bibliometric variables, authorship, collaboration, and citation trends. A previously applied methodology using intermittent years was applied to review the archives of JPS, PSI and EJPS over the last 30 years. Citation data were collected from the Web of Science database. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS 9.4 software. A total of 1917 articles originating from 63 countries met the inclusion criteria. The number of articles published every year increased significantly in the last three decades from 336 in 1987 to 626 in 2017 (P < 0.0001). Multinational papers made up 5% of the total, of which 58% involved more than one continent. A majority of papers (75%) were single institution papers, there was strong evidence of an increase in multi-institution publications over time. There was a statistically significant increase in the number of female first and corresponding author. The publishing landscape of paediatric surgery has evolved to be more inclusive with increased collaboration, female authors and mentors and more publications from developing nations.

Female-Authored Articles Are More Likely to Include Methods-Trained Authors

Objective

Studies with authors trained in research methods are of higher quality than those without. We examined inclusion of authors with master's or doctoral degrees incorporating advanced research methods training on original research articles in high-impact journals, investigating differences between journals and by first-author sex.

Methods

Using all original research articles from 1 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine (Annals), and JAMA-Internal Medicine/Archives of Internal Medicine (Archives) every alternate month, February 1994 to October 2016, we assessed the prevalence of articles listing authors with master's/doctoral research degrees and its adjusted associations with time of publication, journal, and first-author sex via multivariable logistic regression models (accounting for number of authors, study type, specialty/topic, and continent and for interactions between journal and time of publication, study type, and continent).

Results

Of 3009 articles examined, 84.4% (n=2539) had authors listing research degrees. After adjustment, the prevalence of such articles increased from 1994 to 2016 (P<.001), but patterns differed among journals. Annals and NEJM increased to approximately100% by 2016; JAMA and Archives peaked around 2010 to 2011, then declined. Articles with female first authors were more likely to list authors with research degrees (adjusted odds ratio=1.66; 95% CI, 1.29-2.13; P<.001).

Conclusion

The prevalence of original research articles listing authors trained in research methods in high-impact journals increased significantly but is now declining at some journals, with potential effects on quality. The greater prevalence among female first-authored articles suggests possible sex differences in structuring/crediting research teams or subconscious sex bias during review.

Authorship trends in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research: A bibliometric analysis

Publications are an important tool to measure one's success and achievement in academia. They can help propel a career forward and move one into a position of leadership. The overall purpose of this study was to investigate changes in bibliometric variables, authorship, and collaboration trends in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research (JOR®), since its inception in 1983. A bibliometric analysis was completed for all manuscripts meeting the inclusion criteria (638), which were published throughout the inaugural year plus one representative year of each decade. Several parameters were investigated including numbers of manuscripts, authors, collaborating institutions/countries, references, pages, and citations; region of origin and gender of authors over time and by region were main focuses. Significant increases over time were observed in all bibliometric variables analyzed except in the number of pages and citations. There was an approximate 27% point increase for both female first and corresponding authors from 1983 to 2015. While this is most likely due to the increase in the number of women that have entered the field over time, similar increases in the percentage of women holding positions on the JOR editorial board or in leadership positions within in the field may have also contributed to improvements in gender parity. Understanding changes in publishing characteristics over time, by region, and by gender are critical, especially with the rising demands of publishing in academia. JOR has seen increase in most variables analyzed, including improvements in authorship by women in the field of orthopaedic research. © 2018 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 36:3071-3080, 2018.

Trends in Authorship Demographics for Manuscripts Published in The American Journal of Cardiology

The demographics of authors in manuscript publications have been investigated in many specialties but not yet cardiology. We explored the authorship trends in The American Journal of Cardiology, a fundamental journal in this field, to uncover the historical demographic patterns in the field. Manuscripts published in 1958 (the first year of publication), 1966, 1976, 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016 were analyzed. Parameters used were gender of first and last authors, number of authors per article, the authors' qualifications and country of corresponding authors. A total of 4,329 articles were analyzed. We hypothesized an increase in authors per article, variety of authors' degrees, countries contributing to authorship, and an increase in female authorship over time. We found that the mean number of authors per article increased from 1.8 in 1958 to 8.6 in 2016. Qualification varieties of first and last authors also increased, particularly first and last authors holding degrees in MD/PhD and first authors holding masters degrees. Female first and last authorship showed an increase. In 1958, female first authors comprised of 3.0% of all the publications compared with 23% in 2016. Similarly, female last authors accounted for 5.2% of all publications in 1958 compared with 20% in 2016. There was also an increase in articles originating from Europe and Asia. In conclusion, there has been a significant increase in authors per article, variety of author degrees, and contribution from international authors. Despite the relative lack of increase in female cardiologists compared to physicians in other specialties in the United States, female authors in The American Journal of Cardiology have increased significantly over this 58-year time period, surpassing the 13% overall female representation within this specialty.

Authorship Trends in Spine Publications From 2000 to 2015

STUDY DESIGN

Literature review.

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in authorship characteristics for Spine publications from the year 2000 to 2015.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Scientific publications are considered an indication of academic achievement for physicians. Recently, authorship trends have been investigated; however, limited information is available on this topic within spine-specific literature.

METHODS

Original research articles published in Spine in the years 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015 were evaluated. Authorship characteristics were collected for each article, including the number of authors and institutions per publication, first and last authors' sex, publication origin, and highest degree held by the first and last author. Trends over time were analyzed using numeric and visual descriptive analyses including percentages, means, standard deviations, and graphs.

RESULTS

An average of 506 articles per year was published in Spine during the years 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. The number of articles written by 10 or more authors increased during this time (0.9%-14.4%). There was a substantial increase in the number of multiple institutional affiliations (33.6%-68.7%) and articles originating from outside North America (47.6%-55.7%) from 2000 to 2015. The percentage of first authors with bachelor's degrees was higher in 2015 (6.6%) as compared to 2000 (1.4%), and more last authors were identified as MD/PhDs in 2015 (19.2%) than in 2000 (10.0%). Similar female representation was noted for first and last authorship for all years evaluated.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrate increases in authors per article published in Spine from 2000 to 2015. In addition, first authors were more likely to hold bachelor's degrees over time. This may be attributed to increasing competition in spine-related fields, necessitating earlier research exposure to aid in academic achievement. Interestingly, the percentage of female authorship has not changed significantly over time, in contrast with much of the previous literature.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Comparative Analysis of Bibliometric, Authorship, and Collaboration Trends Over the Past 30-Year Publication History of the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma and Injury

OBJECTIVES

In the scientific and medical field, authorship has become increasingly important for tenure and career advancement in addition to improvement in medical care. It was the purpose of this study to investigate changes in bibliometric variables, authorship, and collaboration trends in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT) and Injury over a 30-year period.

METHODS

A bibliometric analysis was completed for all manuscripts meeting the inclusion criteria and published throughout 1 representative year of each decade over the past 30 years. A total of 444 and 1105 manuscripts for JOT and Injury, respectively, met the inclusion criteria. Standard statistical analyses were performed with nonparametric methods for continuous variables and Pearson χ and Cochran linear trend tests for categorical variables. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

There were significant increases over time in all bibliometric variables for both journals, except in the number of countries and pages in JOT. For JOT, the overall percentage of female first authors increased 2.3 times from 1987 to 2015 (P = 0.021). The overall percentage of female corresponding authors was 7.3%. For Injury, the overall percentage of female first authors increased 1.5 times (P = 0.007). The overall percentage of female corresponding authors was 13.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding changes in publishing characteristics over time and by region is critical with the rising demands of publishing in academic medicine. JOT and Injury have showed an increase in most variables analyzed. However, female authorship in JOT is climbing at a higher rate than Injury.

Bibliometric Analysis of Gender Authorship Trends and Collaboration Dynamics Over 30 Years of Spine 1985 to 2015

STUDY DESIGN

A bibliometric analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to study bibliometric changes over the last 30 years of Spine. These trends are important regarding academic publication productivity.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Inflation in authorship number and other bibliometric variables has been described in the scientific literature. The issue of author gender is taking on increasing importance, as efforts are being made to close the gender gap.

METHODS

From 1985 to 2015, 10-year incremental data for several bibliometric variables were collected, including author gender. Standard bivariate statistical analyses were performed. Trends over time were assessed by the Cochran linear trend. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met for 1566 manuscripts. The majority of the manuscripts were from North America (51.2%), Europe (25.2%), and Asia (20.8%). The number of manuscripts, authors, countries, pages, and references all increased from 1985 to 2015. There was a slight increase in female first authors over time (17.5% to 18.4%, P = 0.048). There was no gender change over time for corresponding authors (14.3% to 14.0%, P = 0.29). There was an 88% increase in the percentage of female first authors having male corresponding authors (P = 0.00004), and a 123% increase in male first authors having female corresponding authors (P = 0.0002). The 14% to 18% of female authors in Spine is higher than the ∼5% female membership of the Scoliosis Research Society and North American Spine Society.

CONCLUSION

Manuscripts in Spine over the past 30 years have shown a significant increase in the number of authors, collaborating institutions and countries, printed pages, references, and number of times each manuscript was cited. There has been a mild increase in female first authorship, but none in corresponding authorship. Increases in female authorship will likely require recruitment of more females into the discipline rather than providing females in the discipline with authorship opportunities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

A bibliometric analysis assessing temporal changes in publication and authorship characteristics in The Knee from 1996 to 2016

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based practice is a foundation to clinical excellence. However there remains little evidence on the characteristics of authors who contribute to the evidence-base and whether these have changed over time. The purpose of this study was to explore these characteristics by undertaking a bibliometric analysis to explore publication and authorship characteristics in a leading sub-speciality orthopaedic journal (The Knee) over a 20-year period.

METHODS

All articles published in The Knee in 1996, 2006 and 2016 were identified. For each article, data collected included: highest academic award; profession; gender; continent of first and last author; total number of authors; the level of evidence; and funding source. We analysed temporal changes in these variables using appropriate statistical models.

RESULTS

A total of 413 papers were analysed. Between 1996 to 2016 there has been a significant increase in the overall number of authors, the number of paper submitted from Asia, the proportion of Level 1 or 2 tiered evidence, the proportion of people with Bachelor or Master-level degrees as their highest level of educational award and the proportion of non-medically qualified authors (P<0.001). From 2006 to 2016 there was a significant increase in the proportion of articles whose first author was female (P=0.03), but no significant change in the number of females as last author (P=0.43).

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate that there have been changes in publication and authorship characteristics in this sub-speciality orthopaedic journal during the past 20years. This provides encouraging indication of greater diversification and internationalisation of orthopaedic research.

Historical Analysis of Bibliometric Trends in the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics With a Particular Focus on Sex

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedics is the clinical discipline with the lowest percentage of female residents and faculty. Pediatric orthopaedics has a higher percentage of women than other orthopaedic subspecialties. It was the purpose of this study to examine bibliometric trends in the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics (JPO) with a specific focus on sex.

METHODS

A bibliometeric analysis for the years 2015, 2005, 1995, 1985, 1981 was performed. The names of first and corresponding authors; corresponding author position; country of origin; number of institutions, countries, authors, printed pages, and references was tabulated. Author sex was identified for the first and corresponding authors using the "Baby Name Guesser" (www.gpeters.com/names/baby-names.php). A P<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

There were 746 publications; 68.7% were from North America. The average number of authors, corresponding author position, collaborating institutions, countries, and number of references increased, whereas the number of printed pages decreased. Asia had the greatest number of authors (4.4), with Australia/New Zealand the fewest (3.4). Sex was determined for 98.3% of the first authors and 98.5% of the corresponding authors. There was a significant increase in the number of female first authors over time (5.9% to 25.6%, P<10), especially in Europe and North America. There were significant increase in the number of female corresponding authors over time (5.8% to 17.6%, P=0.000009). There was a significant trend to have a greater percentage of both female first and corresponding authors over time (P=0.0005) with a reverse trend for both male first and corresponding authors (P<10).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we noted that the number of female first and corresponding authors in Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics has been steadily increasing. This should result in more female pediatric orthopaedic surgeons in academic faculty positions.

Bibliometric analysis of authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over the past three decades of BONE's publication history

The existence of a gender gap in academia has been a hotly debated topic over the past several decades. It has been argued that due to the gender gap, it is more difficult for women to obtain higher positions. Manuscripts serve as an important measurement of one's accomplishments within a particular field of academia. Here, we analyzed, over the past 3 decades, authorship and other trends in manuscripts published in BONE, one of the premier journals in the field of bone and mineral metabolism. For this study, one complete year of manuscripts was evaluated (e.g. 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015) for each decade. A bibliometric analysis was then performed of authorship trends for those manuscripts. Analyzed fields included: average number of authors per manuscript, numerical position of the corresponding author, number of institutions collaborating on each manuscript, number of countries involved with each manuscript, number of references, and number of citations per manuscript. Each of these fields increased significantly over the 30-year time frame (p<10^-6). The gender of both the first and corresponding authors was identified and analyzed over time and by region. There was a significant increase in the percentage of female first authors from 23.4% in 1985 to 47.8% in 2015 (p=0.001). The percentage of female corresponding authors also increased from 21.2% in 1985 to 35.4% in 2015 although it was not significant (p=0.07). With such a substantial emphasis being placed on publishing in academic medicine, it is crucial to comprehend the changes in publishing characteristics over time and geographical region. These findings highlight authorship trends in BONE over time as well as by region. Importantly, these findings also highlight where challenges still exist.