Surgical publication activity in the English literature over a 10-year interval

The geographic diversity of authorship in leading general surgery journals; A study of 24,332 authors

BACKGROUND

Research guides evidence-based general surgery practice, advocacy, policy and resource allocation, but is seemingly lacking representation from those countries with greatest disease burden and mortality. Accordingly, we conducted a geographic study of publications in the most impactful general surgery journals worldwide.

METHODS

The six general surgery journals with the highest 2020 impact factors were selected. Only journals specific to general surgery were included. For all original articles over the past five years, the affiliated country and city were extracted for the first, second and last author. Number of publications were adjusted per capita, and compared to Human Development Index (HDI) using logistic regression.

RESULTS

8274 original articles were published in the top six ranked general surgery journals over 2016-2020, with 24,332 affiliated authors. Authors were most commonly associated with the US (27.88%), Japan (9.09%) and China (8.46%), or per capita, The Netherlands, Sweden and Singapore. There is a linear association between publishing in a top six journal and HDI of country of affiliation. Just four publications were from medium or low HDI countries over the period.

CONCLUSION

Authorship in leading general surgery journals is predominantly from wealthy, Western countries. Authorship is associated with affiliation with a high HDI country, with few authors from medium or low HDI countries. There is a lack of representation in literature from Africa, Russia, and parts of Southeast Asia, and thus a lack of locally relevant evidence to guide surgical practice in these areas of high disease burden and low life expectancy.

Prevalence of Workforce Diversity Research Among Surgical Specialties in the United States: How Does Plastic Surgery Compare?

BACKGROUND

Plastic surgeons are not as diverse as expected in relation to the increasingly diverse patient and medical student population. The authors assess the state of diversity in 8 primary surgical specialties in the United States and evaluate trends in research interest in diversity over the past 30 years.

METHODS

Articles regarding diversity in surgery from 1990 to 2020 were systematically reviewed. The Association of American Medical Colleges Physician Specialty Data Reports and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Data Resource Books provided resident/fellow and faculty data from 2011 to 2016. Trends were analyzed over time per specialty.

RESULTS

From 1990 to 2020, a total of 199 publications related to diversity were identified among the various surgical specialties. Orthopedic surgery had significantly more publications per year compared with other specialties (P < 0.05). Every specialty demonstrated a significant increase in publications about diversity over time (P < 0.05). A majority of publications were related to sex rather than underrepresented in medicine topics. The proportion of female surgeons was significantly higher for plastic surgery than for orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery (P < 0.001). Plastic surgery exhibited the highest growth rate in female residents (+1.6% per year, P < 0.001). The proportion of underrepresented minorities composing surgical trainees has not significantly increased in any surgical specialty between 2011 and 2016 (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although diversity representation in surgery has somewhat improved, the rate is too slow to match the growing diversity of the US population. Outcomes have been disparate between specialties and demonstrate greater increases in sex equality relative to ethnic/racial equality. Evidence-based interventions need to be developed and implemented.

Publication activity of chief and consultant general/visceral surgeons in German university hospitals-a ten-year analysis

PURPOSE

The publication activity of 38 German general/visceral surgery university departments, documented by first or last authorship from staff surgeons (chief and consultants), was evaluated.

METHODS

The observation period extended from 2007 to 2017 and all PubMed-listed publications were considered. Impact factor (IF) was evaluated through the publishing journal's 5-year IF in 2016, as was the IF for each individual publication. Ranking was expressed in quartiles.

RESULTS

The staff surgeons of the 38 departments comprised 442 surgeons, of which only 351 (79.4%) were active as first or last authors. Four thousand six hundred and ninety-nine publications published in 702 journals were recorded. The four leading departments in publication number published as much as the last 20 departments (1330 vs. 1336 publications, respectively). The mean of the first (most active) department quartile was 19.6 publications, the second 15.4, the third 11.0, and the last quartile 7.6 per publishing surgeon. The total cumulative impact factor was 14,130. When examining the mean number of publications per publishing surgeons per the 10 year period, the mean of the first quartile was 57.9 cumulative IF, the second 45.0, the third 29.5, and the fourth quartile 17.1. With 352 (7.5%) publications, the most frequently used journal was Chirurg, followed by Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery with 274 (5.8%) publications. Pancreas-related topics led in terms of publication number and IF generated per individual publication.

CONCLUSION

A significant difference in publication performance of individual departments was apparent that cannot be explained by staff number. This indicates that there are as yet unknown factors responsible for minor publication activity in many university departments.