Trends in Pediatric Versus Adult Ophthalmology Publications Over 15 Years

Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Cited Articles in Pediatric Ophthalmology

PURPOSE

To determine and analyze the 100 most cited articles in pediatric ophthalmology.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the ISI Web of Science database on the top 100 most cited articles in pediatric ophthalmology.

RESULTS

The 100 most cited articles were published between 1941 and 2018, with the greatest number published in both 2005 and 2012. A total of 29,731 citations were generated during the study period. There has been a significant increase in citations annually since 1941, with a peak number of citations in 2021 with 2,629 citations. Myopia, retinopathy of prematurity, and other forms of refractive error were the topics most studied and cited in these articles. Most of the articles were classified as either large cohort prospective/retrospective studies (34) or randomized clinical trials (19), with case reports/series being the least frequent (7). Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (23), JAMA Ophthalmology (22), and Ophthalmology (22) published the majority of the articles. Institutions that conducted the majority of the studies presented include the National Eye Institute (10), the Ohio State University College of Optometry (9), and the Oregon Health & Science University (6).

CONCLUSIONS

This bibliometric analysis provides a unique historical perspective of the literature in the field of pediatric ophthalmology that has not been studied before. The research in the field of pediatric ophthalmology is advancing quickly, with most articles and citations occurring within the past 15 years. The strong focus on prospective cohort studies and clinical trials reveals the importance of advancing the treatment of critical disease within the field of pediatric ophthalmology. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2023;60(5):330-336.].

Pediatric Publication Trends in Leading General Ophthalmology Journals for 20 Years

PURPOSE

To evaluate trends in the representation of pediatric-related articles in leading general ophthalmology journals for 20 years.

METHODS

A list of all relevant publications from five top-ranking general ophthalmology journals (Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology, American Journal of Ophthalmology, British Journal of Ophthalmology, and Acta Ophthalmologica) between January 1997 and December 2016 was retrieved using the PubMed search engine. Articles captured by the age filter "child: birth-18 years" were considered pediatric. The annual pediatric publication rate was calculated as the fraction of pediatric articles out of the total number of articles within each year for every journal. A linear mixed effects model was applied to determine the trend in the pediatric publication rate during the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 37,181 publications were included in the analysis, of which 7,828 (21.1%) were classified as "pediatric." During the study period, there was a statistically significant decrease in pediatric publication rates, with an annual absolute decrease of 0.23% (P = .01), yielding relative reduction by approximately 18% over the past two decades.

CONCLUSIONS

Representation of pediatric articles progressively decreased in general ophthalmology journals. This trend has major implications regarding exposure of non-pediatric ophthalmologists to the new developments in pediatric management. In addition, this may imply a difficulty to publish pediatric-related articles in high-ranking general ophthalmology journals. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2020;57(2):78-84.].

Positive results bias in pediatric ophthalmology scientific publications

Previous studies in several fields of medicine, including general ophthalmology, have revealed a positive results bias, demonstrating an association between the results of a trial and the impact factor (IF) of the journal in which it was published. We hypothesized that randomized clinical studies in pediatric ophthalmology with positive results have a greater chance of publication in journals with a higher IF than those with negative results. We analyzed 174 randomized, controlled trials conducted in the field of pediatric ophthalmology, which were retrieved from PubMed. Each study was classified as having either a positive or a negative result. A positive result was defined as a study in which there was a statistically significant difference between groups (P < 0.05). No difference was found in IF between negative and positive outcomes, after statistically adjusting for the number of subjects and year of publication. We concluded that, unlike general ophthalmology, positive results bias probably does not occur in the field of pediatric ophthalmology.