The 100 Most Impactful Papers in Hand and Upper Extremity Surgery over the Last 25 Years: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Orthopaedic Literature

Neil V. Shah; John J. Kelly; Jared M. Newman; Karan Dua; Alba Avoricani; Bassel G. Diebo; Steven M. Koehler

doi:10.1055/s-0040-1710171

Journal of Hand and Microsurgery, Table of Contents

J Hand Microsurg 2022; 14(01): 47-57
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1710171

Original Article

The 100 Most Impactful Papers in Hand and Upper Extremity Surgery over the Last 25 Years: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Orthopaedic Literature

Neil V. Shah

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States

,

John J. Kelly

²School of Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York, United States

,

Jared M. Newman

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States

,

Karan Dua

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States

,

Alba Avoricani

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States

,

Bassel G. Diebo

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States

,

Steven M. Koehler

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Introduction Despite growth in hand/upper extremity investigation, impactful studies have not been thoroughly identified. Previous studies have been limited in scope. This study sought to identify and characterize the most impactful orthopaedic papers in hand/upper extremity over the past 25 years.

Materials and Methods The top 1,000 hand/upper extremity orthopaedic studies published from 1992 to 2017 were identified with Web of Science. After screening for relevance in order of decreasing citation number, the top 100 articles were identified for bibliometric analysis.

Results The mean number of authors and citations were 4.51 (range, 1–21) and 169.4 (range, 105–863). Common study types included, case series (n = 52), randomized controlled trial (n = 17), and prospective cohort (n = 16), which predominantly covered topics related to shoulder (n = 34), wrist/forearm (n = 21), and hand (n = 17). Among wrist/forearm and hand studies, distal radius fractures (n = 12) and nerve-related topics (n = 10) were most frequently analyzed. Most studies were of level IV (n = 51) and level II (n = 16) evidence. Recent studies had greater impact (mean citations/year: 2011, 82.7/year vs. 1992, 16.1/year).

Conclusion Most of the 100 top orthopaedic articles in hand/upper extremity were of level IV or II evidence, retrospective, and nonrandomized. Despite an observed recent increase in level I studies, a lack of prospective, randomized trials is apparent.

Keywords

hand/upper extremity - surgery - bibliometric analysis - top 100 - evidence-based medicine

Full Text

References

References
1 Agarwal A, Durairajanayagam D, Tatagari S. et al. Bibliometrics: tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics. Asian J Androl 2016; 18 (02) 296-309
2 Ellegaard O, Wallin JA. The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact. ? Scientometrics 2015; 105 (03) 1809-1831
3 Loonen MPJ, Hage JJ, Kon M. Value of citation numbers and impact factors for analysis of plastic surgery research. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 120 (07) 2082-2091
4 Moed HF. New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 2009; 57 (01) 13-18
5 Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science 1972; 178 (4060) 471-479
6 Cheek J, Garnham B, Quan J. What’s in a number? Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research(ers). Qual Health Res 2006; 16 (03) 423-435
7 Lefaivre KA, Shadgan B, O’Brien PJ, O’Brien PJ. 100 most cited articles in orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (05) 1487-1497
8 Waltman L, Calero-Medina C, Kosten J. et al. The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 2012; 63 (12) 2419-2432
9 Weingart P. Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?. Scientometrics 2005; 62 (01) 117-131
10 Joyce CW, Kelly JC, Carroll SM. The 100 top-cited classic papers in hand surgery. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 2014; 48 (04) 227-233
11 Garfield E. [The impact factor and its rightful use] (in German). Anaesthesist 1998; 47 (06) 439-440
12 Web of Science. Confident research begins here. Available at: https://clarivate.com/products/web-of-science/. Accessed April 8, 2020
13 Level of Evidence. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/jbjsjournal/Pages/Journals-Level-of-Evidence.aspx. Accessed April 8, 2020
14 InCites Journal Citation Reports. Thomson Reuters. Available at: https://jcr.incites.thomsonreuters.com/. Accessed April 8, 2020
15 Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K. The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86 (02) 219-224
16 Takahara M, Mura N, Sasaki J, Harada M, Ogino T. Classification, treatment, and outcome of osteochondritis dissecans of the humeral capitellum. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (suppl 2, Pt 1) 47-62
17 Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walters MR, Hayward RA. Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am 1998; 23 (04) 575-587
18 Gu W, Yuan Y, Yang H, Qi G, Jin X, Yan J. A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most influential papers on COPD. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2015; 10: 667-676
19 Qu Y, Zhang C, Hu Z. et al. The 100 most influential publications in asthma from 1960 to 2017: a bibliometric analysis. Respir Med 2018; 137: 206-212
20 Brinjikji W, Klunder A, Kallmes DF. The 100 most-cited articles in the imaging literature. Radiology 2013; 269 (01) 272-276
21 Fenton JE, Roy D, Hughes JP, Jones AS. A century of citation classics in otolaryngology-head and neck Surgery journals. J Laryngol Otol 2002; 116 (07) 494-498
22 Loonen MPJ, Hage JJ, Kon M. Plastic surgery classics: characteristics of 50 top-cited articles in four plastic surgery journals since 1946. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121 (05) 320e-327e
23 Ahmad SS, Evangelopoulos DS, Abbasian M, Röder C, Kohl S. The hundred most-cited publications in orthopaedic knee research. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (22) e190
24 Vielgut I, Dauwe J, Leithner A, Holzer LA. The fifty highest cited papers in anterior cruciate ligament injury. Int Orthop 2017; 41 (07) 1405-1412
25 Murray MR, Wang T, Schroeder GD, Hsu WK. The 100 most cited spine articles. Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (10) 2059-2069
26 Kelly JC, Glynn RW, O’Briain DE, Felle P, McCabe JP. The 100 classic papers of orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92 (10) 1338-1343
27 Mehlman CT, Wenger DR. The top 25 at 25: citation classics in the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. J Pediatr Orthop 2006; 26 (05) 691-694
28 Lifchez SD, Friedrich JB, Hultman CS. The scope of practice of hand surgery within plastic surgery: the ACAPS national survey to assess current practice and develop educational guidelines. Ann Plast Surg 2015; 74 (01) 89-92
29 Shah NV, Solow M, Kelly JJ. et al. Demographics and rates of surgical arthroscopy and postoperative rehabilitative preferences of arthroscopists from the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA). J Orthop 2018; 15 (02) 591-595
30 Tang X, Gong W, Yuan F. et al. Top-cited articles in digestive system disease from 1950 to 2013. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 31 (01) 107-111
31 Sur RL, Dahm P. History of evidence-based medicine. Indian J Urol 2011; 27 (04) 487-489
32 DeFroda SF, Shah KN, Safdar O, Mulcahey MK. Trends in research productivity of residents applying for orthopedic sports medicine fellowship. Phys Sportsmed 2018; 46 (01) 61-65
33 Kohlert S, Zuccaro L, McLean L, Macdonald K. Does medical school research productivity predict a resident’s research productivity during residency?. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017; 46 (01) 34
34 Finkler ES, Fogel HA, Kroin E. et al. Factors influencing the number of applications submitted per applicant to orthopedic residency programs. Med Educ Online 2016; 21: 31865
35 Browner BD. The Bone and Joint Decade, 2000–2010. J Bone Jt Surg Am 1999; 81-A (07) 903-904
36 Kavanagh RG, Kelly JC, Kelly PM, Moore DP. The 100 classic papers of pediatric orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (18) e134
37 Huo YQ, Pan XH, Li QB. et al. Fifty top-cited classic papers in orthopedic elbow surgery: A bibliometric analysis. Int J Surg 2015; 18: 28-33
38 Hohmann E, Glatt V, Tetsworth K. Worldwide orthopaedic research activity 2010-2014: Publication rates in the top 15 orthopaedic journals related to population size and gross domestic product. World J Orthop 2017; 8 (06) 514-523
39 Poolman RW, Struijs PAA, Krips R, Sierevelt IN, Lutz KH, Bhandari M. Does a “Level I Evidence” rating imply high quality of reporting in orthopaedic randomised controlled trials?. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6: 44
40 Bhandari M, Richards RR, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH. The quality of reporting of randomized trials in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery from 1988 through 2000. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002; 84 (03) 388-396