International Collaboration in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Framework for Establishing Meaningful International Alliances

Global research output and highly-cited publications on prosthetic joint infections: A bibliometric analysis (2003-2022)

Backgroundand aims

Prosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) is a serious clinical problem after Arthroplasty. The research field on PJI is emerging, but there is a paucity of information on the most impactful publications on it. This prompted us to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the global research output, from 2003 to 2022, to identify the growth of publications, the key players in this research field and to evaluate the characteristics of highly-cited publications (HCPs) on the PJI.

Methods

Publications related to PJI research were identified globally from the Scopus database, using specific keywords, covering the literature from 2003 to 2022. The HCPs were considered those with 100 or more citations. Information on publication year, citation count, funding sources, title, author, journal, country, institution, research area, and strategic keywords were collected from these HCPs. Publication data was imported into Microsoft Excel and analyzed further using VOSviewer and R software.

Results

There were 182 HCPs (3.12%), which received a total citation of 124701 (average CPP of 21.41), with the citation range from 100 to 1921. Research articles were the most predominant publications (69.2%), but their average citations per paper (CPP) of 189.78 was lower than that of Review articles (average CPP: 253.17). The USA has been the leading country in terms of total publications (31.58%), and HCPs (36.99%), followed by Switzerland, Spain, UK and China. There were no HCPs from developing countries. J. Parvizi of Thomas Jefferson University, USA (with a total publications of 31 and an average CPP of 315.7), and W. Zimmerli of Basel University, Switzerland (with a TP of 11 and an average CPP of 341.9), were the most productive and impactful authors in PJI global research output.

Conclusion

This bibliometric analysis identified the most productive and impactful authors, organizations, countries, and journals in the research of PJI, of the last two decades.

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

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Disparities Among Leading Publishers of Arthroplasty Research

BACKGROUND

Despite the importance of diversity in advancing scientific progress, diversity among leading authors in arthroplasty has not been examined. This study aimed to identify, characterize, and assess disparities among leading authors in arthroplasty literature from 2002 to 2019.

METHODS

Articles published between 2002 and 2019 from 12 academic journals that publish orthopedic and arthroplasty research were extracted from PubMed. Original articles containing keywords related to arthroplasty were analyzed. Author gender was assigned using the Genderize algorithm. Gender and characterization of the top 100 male and female authors utilized available information on academic profiles.

RESULTS

From the 14,692 articles that met inclusion criteria, the genders of 23,626 unique authors were identified. Women were less likely than men to publish 5 years after beginning their publishing careers (adjusted odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.57, P < .001). Of the top 100 authors, 96 were men, while only 4 were women. Orthopedic surgeons made up 93 of 100 top authors, of which 92 were men and 1 was a woman. Among the top 10 publishing female and male authors, 10 of 10 men were orthopedic surgeons, only 2 of 10 women were physicians, and only one was an attending orthopedic surgeon.

CONCLUSION

While the majority of authors with high arthroplasty publication volume were orthopedic surgeons, there were significant gender disparities among the leading researchers. We should continue working to increase gender representation and supporting the research careers of women in arthroplasty.