Defining Common Features in High Impact and Highly Cited Journal Articles on Pancreatic Tumors: An Analysis of 1044 Studies over the Past Decade

Dynamics of Acute Postsurgical Pain over the Last Decade: A Bibliometric Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Minimizing acute postsurgical pain (APSP) remains a challenge, despite extensive research about it. This study comprehensively analyzed the literature on APSP to assess how the field has developed and where it may go in the future.

METHODS

Studies on APSP indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection and published from 2012 to 2021 were assessed for eligibility. Data from included studies were analyzed using CiteSpace, Python, and Microsoft.

RESULTS

Analysis of 5,236 publications on APSP showed that the number of articles per year has increased linearly. The United States leads other countries in terms of the number and centrality of publications. Cocitation analysis suggests that the field focused earlier on the incidence and risk factors of APSP, shifting later to a focus on the reduction and management of adverse outcomes due to APSP. The top-ranked keyword cluster during the study period was "short-term outcomes" (#0), followed by "risk factors" (#1). The strongest burst occurred for the keyword "combination," followed by "multimodal analgesia." The most recent burst occurred for the keywords "regional analgesia," "opioid use," "erector spinae plane block," and "infiltration."

CONCLUSIONS

Hotspots in APSP research since 2012 have been incidence, risk factors, and control of negative outcomes. Future research is likely to concentrate on the use of opioids and technological innovations in regional anesthesia. Our findings may help APSP researchers and clinicians understand their field, optimize clinical practice, and plan future research.

Gender Disparity in the Citation of Surgical Research

BACKGROUND

Women surgeons face numerous barriers to career advancement. Inequitable citation of surgical literature may represent a contributing factor to gender disparities in academic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional analysis of publications from 50 top-ranking surgery journals in 2017 and 2018, as defined by the 2019 InCites Journal Citation Reports. The citation rate of publications by women vs men first authors was compared. Similarly, the citation rate of publications by men vs women last authors was also compared. Adjusted regression analyses of citation rates accounted for the time interval since publication as well as the journal within which the article was published, among other potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 19,084 publications from 48 surgery journals with a median (interquartile range) of 8 (4 to 15) citations contributing to a median (interquartile range) Journal Impact Factor of 4.0 (3.4 to 4.6) were analyzed. Compared with man-first author publications, woman-first author publications demonstrated a 9% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.91, p < 0.001). Similarly, compared with publications by man-last authors, woman-last author publications demonstrated a 4% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.96, p = 0.03). These associations persisted after multivariable adjustment for additional confounding factors, however, not on sensitivity analysis of 24 of the highest-ranking journals.

CONCLUSIONS

Among top-tier surgical journals, publications by women-first and -last authors were less cited compared with publications by men-first and -last authors, but not among the highest-tier surgical journals. Gender bias may exist in the citation of surgical research, contributing to gender disparities in academic surgery.