Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2018 / Cilt: 52 - Sayı: 5

Worldwide arthroplasty research productivity and contribution of Turkey

Pages
376–381
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and research foundationhad positive affect on arthroplasty publications, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: Bibliometrics is increasingly used to assess the quantity and quality of scientific research output inmany research fields worldwide.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to evaluate theworldwide research productivity and status of Turkey in the field of arthroplasty using bibliometricmethods and to provide an insight into the arthroplasty research for surgeons and researchers.Methods: The Web of Science database was searched to identify arthroplasty articles published between2006 and 2016.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and research foundationhad positive affect on arthroplasty publications, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Purpose: Bibliometrics is increasingly used to assess the quantity and quality of scientific research output inmany research fields worldwide. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have documented themain characteristics of arthroplasty publications from different countries. This study aimed to evaluate theworldwide research productivity and status of Turkey in the field of arthroplasty using bibliometricmethods and to provide an insight into the arthroplasty research for surgeons and researchers.Methods: The Web of Science database was searched to identify arthroplasty articles published between2006 and 2016. The contributions of countries were evaluated based on publication count, citationaverage, h-index and publication rate in the top 10 ranked journals. Each countries publication outputwas adjusted according to population size.Results: A total of 26.167 articles were identified. World arthroplasty publications were increasedsignificantly over time (p < .005). The United States was the most productive country with 9007 articles(34,4% of total) followed by England with 2939 articles (11,4 of total) and Germany with 1881 articles(7,1% of total). According to average citations per item, Scotland was in the first place followed byDenmark and Sweden, whereas in the first place according to publication output adjusted by populationsize was Switzerland followed by Denmark and Scotland. The United States was also in the first placeaccording to h-index and publication rate in the top 10 ranked journals. Founding average was 28,8%(7539 of 26164) for the arthroplasty articles that were analyzed in the study.Conclusion: There is a rapid increase in the number of articles in arthroplasty research from 2006 to 2016.The United States was the most productive country as measured by total publications in the arthroplastyfield. However, some small European countries with high in-come have higher quality of articles and betterproductivity when adjusted for population. Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and research foundationhad positive affect on arthroplasty publications, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇATAL, B., AKMAN, Y. E., ŞÜKÜR, E., AZBOY, İ. (2018). Worldwide arthroplasty research productivity and contribution of Turkey. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 52 - Sayı: 5, 376–381. https://ajindex.com/articles/353953

References (2)

  1. Vose PB, Cervellini A. Technical co-operation: problems of scientific research in developing countries. IAEA Bull. 1983;25(2):37. Frist WH. Federal funding for biomedical research: commitment and benefits. JAMA. 2002;287(13):1722e1724. Nathan DG. Clinical research: perceptions, reality, and proposed solutions. National Institutes of health Director's panel on clinical research. JAMA. 1998;280(16):1427e1431. May RM. The scientific wealth of nations. Science. 1997;275(5301):793. Langer A, Diaz-Olavarrieta C, Berdichevsky K, Villar J. Why is research from developing countries underrepresented in international health literature, and what can be done about it? Bull World Health Organ. 2004;82(10):802e803. Michalopoulos A, Falagas ME. A bibliometric analysis of global research production in respiratory medicine. Chest. 2005;128(6):3993e3998. Hauptman JS, Chow DS, Martin NA, Itagaki MW. Research productivity in neurosurgery: trends in globalization, scientific focus, and funding. J Neurosurg. 2011;115(6):1262e1272. Vergidis PI, Karavasiou AI, Paraschakis K, Bliziotis IA, Falagas ME. Bibliometric analysis of global trends for research productivity in microbiology. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;24(5):342e346. Hui Z, Yi Z, Peng J. Bibliometric analysis of the orthopedic literature. Orthopedics. 2013;36(10):e1225ee1232. Luo X, Liang Z, Gong F, et al. Worldwide productivity in the field of foot and ankle research from 2009e2013: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. J Foot Ankle Res. 2015;8(12):1e6. Liang Z, Luo X, Gong F, et al. Worldwide research productivity in the field of arthroscopy: a bibliometric analysis. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(8):1452e1457. Zhang WJ, Ding W, Jiang H, et al. National representation in the plastic and reconstructive surgery literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70(2):231e234. Li Q, Jiang Y, Zhang M. National representation in the emergency medicine literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30(8):1530e1534. Li Z, Qiu LX, Wu FX, et al. Assessing the national productivity in subspecialty critical care medicine journals: a bibliometric analysis. J Crit Care. 2012;27(6): 747.e1e747.e5. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD.
  2. 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): 1338e1343. Similowski T, Derenne JP. Bibliometry of