Authorship trends in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research: A bibliometric analysis

Scholarly trends in global orthopedics research published through the journal of orthopaedics: A bibliometric analysis from 2013 to 2024

Background and aims

We provide an overview and data visualization trends of orthopaedic research published by the Journal of Orthopedics (JOO) from 2013 to 2024.

Methods

We used Scopus database to retrieve all articles published by the JOO from 2013 to 2024, as of 15.7.2024. Bibliometric analysis and visualization of the global orthopaedic literature were performed using Microsoft Excel and VOSviewer software to explore the research hotspots in this field in the past 12 years.

Results

The 2074 publications covered in the JOO published between 2013 and 2024 were identified. The annual average and six-year cumulative publications depicted growth rates of 36.23 % and 147.99 %, respectively. Of the 80 global publications, the main participating countries were from Europe (n = 26), and Asia (n = 13). North America (37.37 %), Europe (34.89 %) and Asia (30.42 %) contributed a significant share of journal output. The most contributing countries were the USA, followed by the U.K., India, and Japan. The visualization and analysis of topical research trends reveal that the JOO covers almost the entire spectrum of orthopaedic research, with the most focus on the Knee (26.38 %), Hip (21.53 %), Shoulder (8.79 %) and Spine (7.09 %) and its subfields, such as arthroplasty (882 papers), surgery (192 papers), radiography (177 papers), osteoarthritis (166), pain (135 papers), fractures (133) and arthroscopy (70). The 68 (3.32 %) of the 2047 publications received 30 and above citations and together received 3466 citations, constituting 51.73 % share of total citations. The Hospital for Special Surgery (USA), and Singapore General Hospital were the most productive organizations, while the most impactful organizations were the University of Toledo Medical Center (USA), and Università degli Studi di Messina (Italy). The most productive authors were R. Vaishya (India), and J.A. Dubin (USA), whereas V. Filardi (Italy) and J.M. Newman (USA) were the most impactful authors of the JOO.

Conclusion

The JOO is a destination for global orthopaedic research. It has progressively received an increasing number of manuscripts and depicted high annual average publication growth rates, besides witnessing an increase in the significant number of citations received. It has helped to improve the journal's ranking, impact and reputation.

Publication trends in the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

BACKGROUND

As the field of orthopedic surgery advances, the quality of research articles and characteristics of authors of these publications continue to change. Various orthopedic journals report that there have been an increased number of authors per publication over the years. However, there have not been any reported changes in publication trends in upper extremity orthopedic journals over the past decade. Thus, the purpose of this study is to evaluate trends in characteristics of articles published in the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES) from 2012 to 2022, including type of study, level of evidence, country of publication, and author information.

METHODS

Articles published in JSES between 2012 and 2022 were retrieved from the JSES Archives. Title, level of evidence, description of the study as delineated in the abstract, first author degree, number of authors, and country of publication were recorded for each published article.

RESULTS

A total of 3577 articles were published in JSES from 2012 to 2022. The average number of authors per article was 5.77 ± 2.6 with a significantly increasing trend over the study period. There was also a significant increase in non-medical degree or equivalent first authorship. The proportion of clinical studies with original data published per year significantly decreased while studies with nonoriginal data including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and narrative reviews significantly increased over the study period.

CONCLUSION

There have been various publication trends in JSES over the last decade. These trends are important to acknowledge when evaluating the quality of recent publications.

Validation of a novel system to quantify authorship diversity in orthopaedic surgery literature

PURPOSE

The diversity of authors in orthopaedic literature is fundamental to the distribution of unique discoveries, innovations, and advancements. The purpose of the current study was to create and validate a comprehensive Author Diversity Scoring System (ADSS) to quantify authorship diversity in orthopaedic manuscripts.

METHODS

Six items were included in the initial ADSS. The ADSS and associated survey were sent to 120 experts to evaluate the clarity, simplicity, and relevancy its components. Responses were used to validate the ADSS using Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI).

RESULTS

The initial ADSS contained author gender, ethnicity, academic rank/title, country of origin of the article, affiliated institution, and the publication history of the senior/corresponding author as representative items. Subsequently, 21 experts completed the survey (response rate 17.5%). Following validation, the final ADSS included author gender, ethnicity, and region of article origin, scored cumulatively on a 0-30 point scale with increasing scores indicating greater author diversity.

CONCLUSION

The validated ADSS scoring system quantitatively assesses manuscript author diversity.

A Comparison of Plastic Surgery Authorship Trends Under Single Versus Double-Blinded Review

INTRODUCTION

Research is key to academic advancement in plastic surgery. However, access to publication opportunities may be inequitable as seen in other fields. We compared authorship trends of plastic surgery manuscripts that underwent single-blinded review (SBR) versus double-blinded review (DBR) to identify potential disparities in publication opportunities.

METHODS

Publications from two plastic surgery journals using SBR and two using DBR from September 2019 to September 2021 were evaluated. Name and institution of the article's first and senior author and journal's editor-in-chief (EIC) were recorded. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact analyses were used to compare author characteristics between SBR and DBR articles.

RESULTS

Of 2500 manuscripts, 65.7% underwent SBR and 34.3% underwent DBR. SBR articles had higher percentages of women as first authors (31.9% versus 24.3%, P < 0.001) but lower percentages of first (50.7% versus 71.2%, P < 0.001) and senior (49.6% versus 70.3%, P < 0.001) authors from international institutions. First (26.0% versus 12.9%, P < 0.001) and senior (27.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.007) authors of SBR articles tended to have more plastic surgery National Institutes of Health funding. Journals using SBR tended to have higher rates of authorship by EICs or authors sharing institutions with the EIC (P ≤ 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

While associated with greater female first authorship suggesting potential efforts toward gender equity in academia, SBR of plastic surgery articles tends to favor authors from institutions with higher National Institutes of Health funding and disadvantage authors from international or lower-resourced programs. Careful consideration of current peer-review proceedings may make publication opportunities more equitable.

How many authors are (too) many? A retrospective, descriptive analysis of authorship in biomedical publications

Publishing in academic journals is primary to disseminate research findings, with authorship reflecting a scientist’s contribution, yielding academic recognition, and carrying significant financial implications. Author numbers per article have consistently risen in recent decades, as demonstrated in various journals and fields. This study is a comprehensive analysis of authorship trends in biomedical papers from the NCBI PubMed database between 2000 and 2020, utilizing the Entrez Direct (EDirect) E-utilities to retrieve bibliometric data from a dataset of 17,015,001 articles. For all publication types, the mean author number per publication significantly increased over the last two decades from 3.99 to 6.25 (+ 57%, p < 0.0001) following a linear trend (r2 = 0.99) with an average relative increase of 2.28% per year. This increase was highest for clinical trials (+ 5.67 authors per publication, + 97%), the smallest for case reports (+ 1.01 authors, + 24%). The proportion of single/solo authorships dropped by a factor of about 3 from 17.03% in 2000 to 5.69% in 2020. The percentage of eleven or more authors per publication increased ~ sevenfold, ~ 11-fold and ~ 12-fold for reviews, editorials, and systematic reviews, respectively. Confirming prior findings, this study highlights the escalating authorship in biomedical publications. Given potential unethical practices, preserving authorship as a trustable indicator of scientific performance is critical. Understanding and curbing questionable authorship practices and inflation are imperative, as discussed through relevant literature to tackle this issue.

Global Research Trends in the Latarjet Procedure: A Bibliometric and Visualized Study

Background and Objectives: Latarjet is among the procedures indicated to treat shoulder instability, producing excellent results, including low instability rates and high patient satisfaction. The aim of this study was to report the characteristics of scientific articles that address the subject of the Latarjet procedure through the use of bibliometric analysis. Materials and Methods: Bibliographic searches were performed for original articles published in journals indexed by the Web of Science database until 2021, with no language restrictions. Results: A total of 668 articles published in 87 journals were included. The first publication was in 1981; the most registered publications were in 2018 and 2021 (89 articles), with an annual percentage growth rate of 11.9. Provencher MT was the author with the most published articles, and the institutional affiliation with the most original articles was the Steadman Philippon Research Institute. The most cited article was a study by Burkhart and Beer, and the scientific journal with the most publications on the subject was the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. Most published studies included keywords such as dislocation, instability, and meta-analysis. Conclusion: There has been a sustained increase in original articles on the Latarjet procedure. However, the greatest growth in articles has occurred during the last decade, demonstrating the considerable interest among the world scientific community.

Gender Disparity Trends in Authorship of Hand Surgery Research

PURPOSE

Despite an overall trend towards gender parity, women continue to remain underrepresented in surgical fields. Until recently, women's representation in hand surgery literature was largely unexplored. The objective of this study was to examine how authorship gender trends among academic hand surgeons have evolved between 2006 and 2019.

METHODS

Original research articles published from 2006 to 2019 in 3 leading clinical hand surgery journals were extracted from PubMed. Publications with a full author first name were analyzed, and the gender of each author was assigned with the validated Genderize algorithm. Analyses were performed to evaluate authorship publication trends, unique authors, and research career productivity.

RESULTS

From 2006 to 2019, 4,769 articles met the inclusion criteria, and the genders of 17,102 authors were identified. There were 2,848 (16.6%) female authors and 14,254 (83.4%) male authors. The proportion of female authors increased from 13.4% to 19.9% from 2006 to 2019. Similarly, female representation as first and senior authors increased significantly, from 10.9% to 20.1% and 7.6% to 14.2%, respectively. Of the 8,417 unique authors, 1,775 (21.1%) were women and 6,642 (78.9%) were men. Only 3.3% of these unique female authors published 5 or more papers during the study period. Among the 10 most frequently published authors for each gender, 18 of the 20 authors were surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been substantial progress toward gender parity in academic hand surgery over the last 14 years, and the proportion of women publishing in leadership positions has increased.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Increased gender representation in medicine and research is important for both patients and providers, and these findings suggest that ongoing support and mentorship for women in academic careers should be a priority.

Middle East Authors' Contribution to the Journal of Arthroplasty's Publications in the Past 20 years (2000-2020)

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the Middle East (ME) countries' contribution to the Journal of Arthroplasty (JOA)'s publications in the past 20 years.

METHODS

All articles published in JOA from 2000 to 2020 were evaluated for the contribution prevalence of ME countries' authors, which were divided into category I, if all the authors were affiliated to ME institutions, and category II, if at least one coauthor affiliated to ME institutions was listed in the articles with other international authors.

RESULTS

A total of 7837 original articles were evaluated. Authors affiliated with ME institutions contributed to 144 (1.8%) articles (148 individual country contributions) from ten (62.5%) out of a total of 16 ME countries. Sixty-eight articles (47.2%) were classified as category I; cooperation between different ME institutes (The authors were from two different ME countries.) was reported in two (1.4%) articles. The top five contributing countries were Egypt, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, contributing 89.2% of the total articles published by ME institutions. Out of the 144 articles, 80 (55.6%) articles were published between 2016 and 2020, 37 (25.7%) articles between 2011 and 2015, and 29 (20.1%) articles between 2000 and 2010. There was a 15.7% mean annual growth in the percentage of ME articles.

CONCLUSION

Although there was an increasing trend in the contributions of ME countries' authors to JOA publications over the past 20 years, the overall contribution is still low; moreover, the cooperation between ME institutions is minimal.

Significant increase in quantity and quality of knee arthroplasty related research in KSSTA over the past 15 years

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate both publication and authorship characteristics in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy journal (KSSTA) regarding knee arthroplasty over the past 15 years.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles published in KSSTA between January 1, 2006, and December 31st, 2020, utilising the search term 'knee arthroplasty'. 1288 articles met the inclusion criteria. The articles were evaluated using the following criteria: type of article, type of study, main topic and special topic, use of patient-reported outcome scores, number of references and citations, level of evidence (LOE), number of authors, gender of the first author and continent of origin. Three time intervals were compared: 2006-2010, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020.

RESULTS

Between 2016 and 2020, publications peaked at 670 articles (52%) compared with 465 (36%) published between 2011 and 2016 and 153 articles (12%) between 2006 and 2010. While percentage of reviews (2006-2010: 0% vs. 2011-2015: 5% vs. 2016-2020: 5%) and meta-analyses (1% vs. 6% vs. 5%) increased, fewer case reports were published (13% vs. 3% vs. 1%) (p < 0.001). Interest in navigation and computer-assisted surgery decreased, whereas interest in perioperative management, robotic and individualized surgery increased over time (p < 0.001). There was an increasing number of references [26 (2-73) vs. 30 (2-158) vs. 31 (1-143), p < 0.001] while number of citations decreased [30 (0-188) vs. 22 (0-264) vs. 6 (0-106), p < 0.001]. LOE showed no significant changes (p = 0.439). The number of authors increased between each time interval (p < 0.001), while the percentage of female authors was comparable between first and last interval (p = 0.252). Europe published significantly fewer articles over time (56% vs. 47% vs. 52%), whereas the number of articles from Asia increased (35% vs. 45% vs. 37%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Increasing interest in the field of knee arthroplasty-related surgery arose within the last 15 years in KSSTA. The investigated topics showed a significant trend towards the latest techniques at each time interval. With rising number of authors, the part of female first authors also increased-but not significantly. Furthermore, publishing characteristics showed an increasing number of publications from Asia and a slightly decreasing number in Europe.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Assessing the recognition of female orthopaedic surgeons in Castle Connolly's "America's Top Doctors" from 2000 to 2020

BACKGROUND

The field of orthopaedic surgery has one of the lowest percentages of practicing female physicians. Studies have shown disparities in various academic societies' award recipients by sex. Given the recent increased use of physician rating platforms by patients and focus on consumer-driven healthcare, our aim was to assess the recognition of female orthopaedic surgeons.

METHODS

A twenty-year quantitative analysis was performed comparing the rate of top female orthopaedic surgeons listed on Castle Connolly's "America's Top Doctors" to the percentage of practicing female orthopaedic surgeons as reported by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2020, there was a statistically significant increase in the percentage of top female orthopaedic surgeons listed on Castle Connolly (1.3%-5.3%), as well as an increase in overall practicing AAOS female members (2.7%-5.8%). When comparing the rate of top female orthopaedic surgeons listed on Castle Connolly to the proportion of practicing female AAOS members from 2000 to 2020, there were no statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in the rate of top female orthopaedic surgeons recognized by Castle Connolly was proportionate to the increase in percentage of practicing female AAOS members over the past 20 years. This study highlights the persistence of a gender discrepancy in the academic sector of orthopaedic surgery.

Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years

Publication and authorship are important in academia for career advancement, obtaining grants, and improved patient care. There has been a recent interest in bibliometric changes over time, especially regarding the gender gap. The purpose of this study was to explore bibliometric changes in the musculoskeletal literature. Bibliometric variables (number of authors, institutions, countries, pages, references, corresponding author position, author gender, geographic region of origin, and editorial board makeup) were analyzed for 5 basic science and 12 clinically oriented musculoskeletal journals from 1985 through 2016. Statistical analyses comprised bivariate analyses, multifactorial ANOVAs, and logistic regression analyses. A p < 0.005 was considered significant. Nearly, all variables increased over time. Asia had the highest number of authors and corresponding author positions, Australia/New Zealand the highest number of institutions and references, North America the highest number of pages, and Europe the highest number of countries. Those with a female first author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Likewise, those with a female corresponding author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Single-authored manuscripts decreased over time. The percentage of female first authors rose from 10.8% in 1985-1987 to 23.7% in 2015-2016. There were more female 1^st authors in the basic science journals compared to the clinical journals (33.2% vs. 12.7%). Single-authored manuscripts were more likely to be written by males (5.1 vs. 2.4%) and decreased over time. The many differences by geographic region of origin likely reflect different socio/cultural attitudes regarding academia and research, as well as the gender composition of the disciplines by geographic region. Overall, there has been an increase in the number of female 1^st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.

Comparing the gender diversity and affiliation trends of the authors for two orthopaedics journals from the Arab world

OBJECTIVES

Authorship trends, female authors' contributions, and the collaboration among institutions have been a concern in the medical field. This study primarily aims to report and compare the number of authors per article and the prevalence of female authors by comparing two orthopaedics journals from the Arab world. The secondary objective of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of the authors' affiliations and the pattern in institutions' collaborations and contributions to the published articles.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study reviewed all articles (until July 2020) published in the Archives of the Egyptian Orthopaedic Journal (EOJ) (the official journal of the Egyptian Orthopaedic Association) and the Journal of Musculoskeletal Surgery and Research (JMSR) (the official journal of the Saudi Orthopaedic Association).

RESULTS

We evaluated 383 and 122 articles from the EOJ and JMSR, respectively. The average number of authors per article was significantly higher for JMSR (4.3 ± 1.7) than EOJ (2.0 ± 1.0); p = 0.000. There was a significantly larger number of contributions by female authors in JMSR (75, 14.2%) than EOJ (2, 0.3%); p = 0.000. The average number of institutions per article was significantly larger for JMSR (2.1 ± 1.2) than EOJ (1.1 ± 0.3); p = 0.000. For the JMSR, the incidence of national institutions' cooperation (27.9%) and international institutions' contributions (53.3%) were significantly higher than their counterparts for the EOJ-6% and 4.7%, respectively; p = 0.000.

CONCLUSION

The JMSR showed superiority regarding the number of authors per article and the prevalence of female authors. The incidence of national institutions' cooperation and international contributions were higher in the JMSR compared with the EOJ.

A decade of evolution in Indonesian orthopedic publication: A bibliographic report

During the past decade, there was an increasing interest in orthopedic research in Indonesia. Therefore we aimed to investigate the profile of Indonesian orthopedic trend publication from 2010 to 2019. Systematic research was conducted to identify all orthopedic articles authored by Indonesian orthopedic surgeons. Article details (number of authors, authors' affiliation, publishing journal), type of author's affiliation, affiliate collaboration, study field, type, and level of evidence (LOE) were recorded and evaluated. Publishing journal metric and author h-index were also recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Two hundred and twenty articles were included in our study. Clinical studies were the most common article type, followed by case reports and basic science. Among clinical articles, therapeutic studies were found significantly more frequent. On the other hand, economic studies were not found in this study period. The most popular field was oncology, followed by knee and spine. The average number of authors per article was 5.23 with a total of 205 individuals who had contributed during this decade. University hospital was the most common affiliation found and single-center study was the most common affiliate collaboration. The most common level of evidence was level V (case reports). Eighty-seven specific publishing journals were identified. More than 42% of the articles were published in journals with SJR between 0.25 and 0.50. The average author h-index was 3.56 (0-7). Although there was an increasing trend and quantity of publications among Indonesian authors, most articles had level 5 evidence (case reports) and the quality of publishing journals was mostly Q3 with a low-moderate SJR. Improvement of the article's quality and institutional collaboration will be needed for future contribution in global orthopedic society.

Gender and Invited Authorship in the Journal of Pediatric Urology

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the evolving role of gender in invited authorship and editorial positions in the Journal of Pediatric Urology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We recorded editorial board members and first and senior authors for all editorials and invited commentaries for all issues of the Journal of Pediatric Urology from 2005 to August 2018. We also recorded first and senior authors for original research articles from selected years for comparison. Gender was confirmed for each individual by visiting institutional websites and performing internet searches. The same was done for the Societies for Pediatric Urology membership.

RESULTS

A total of 143 editorials and 162 invited commentaries were identified within the study period, with numbers increasing each year. Overall, these publications had 448 first and senior authorships, of which 10% were female. Of the 898 editorial board positions over the study period, 7% were held by females. The proportion of female authorships increased over time (P = .04), while the proportion of female board members did not (P = .9).

CONCLUSIONS

Female invited authorship has increased over the past 13 years in the Journal of Pediatric Urology. However, editorial board membership has lagged, indicating an opportunity for improvement.

The global state of clinical research and trends in periprosthetic joint infection: A bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to estimate the trends and state of research in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

Publications on PJI published between 1998 and 2018 were searched in the Web of Science database and analyzed using bibliometrics. The Altmetric score and Research Interest score were combined to provide a weighted count. The scope of the Altmetric score includes >16 weighted composite scores from websites such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, whereas the Research Interest score is calculated from information derived from ResearchGate.

RESULTS

Total of 3245 published documents were identified. The largest contribution was made by the United States, with the institution contributing most being the Rothman Institute. The most relative articles were published by the Journal of Arthroplasty, whereas the highest citation frequency journal was Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. There was a positive correlation between citation counts and Research Interest scores, while the Altmetric Attention score showed a negative value for highly cited articles.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current trends of globalization, there is a rising trend in publications on PJI, with the largest annual contributions made by the United States. The most influential contributors are researchers from the United States and Europe. Twitter is used as a platform to communicate knowledge by most PJI researchers. The most recent research has focused on the diagnosis and risk factors of PJI.

Bibliometric and authorship trends over a 30 year publication history in two representative US sports medicine journals

Bibliometric studies are important to understand changes and improvement opportunities in academia. This study compared bibliometric trends for two major sports medicine/arthroscopy journals, the American Journal of Sports Medicine® (AJSM®) and Arthroscopy® over the past 30 years. Trends over time and comparisons between both journals were noted for common bibliometric variables (number of authors, references, pages, citations, and corresponding author position) as well as author gender and continental origin. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed. A p < 0.001 was considered statistically significant. One representative year per decade was used. There were 814 manuscripts from AJSM® and 650 from Arthroscopy®. For AJSM® the number of manuscripts steadily increased from 86 in 1986 to 350 in 2016; for Arthroscopy® the number of manuscripts increased from 73 in 1985/1986, to 267 in 2006, but then dropped to 229 in 2016. There were significant increases in all bibliometric variables, except for the number of citations which decreased in Arthroscopy®. There were significant differences in manuscript region of origin by journal (p = 0.000002). Arthroscopy® had a greater percentage of manuscripts from Asia than AJSM® (19.3% vs 11.5%) while AJSM® had a greater percentage from North America (70.3% vs 59.2%); both journals had similar percentages from Europe (18.2% for AJSM® and 21.6% for Arthroscopy®). For AJSM® the average percentage of female first authors was 13.3%, increasing from 4.7% in 1986 to 19.3% in 2016; the average percentage of female corresponding authors was 7.3%. For Arthroscopy®, the average percentage of female first authors was 8.1%, increasing from 2.8% in 1985/1986 to 15.7% in 2016 (p = 0.00007). In conclusion, AJSM® and Arthroscopy® showed an increase in most variables analyzed. Although Arthroscopy® is climbing at a higher rate than AJSM® for female authors, AJSM® has an overall greater percentage of female authors.

Trends in Gender Authorship and Collaborations: A 30-Year Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Manuscripts from The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery and The Bone and Joint Journal

Publishing original peer-reviewed research is essential for advancement through all career stages. Fewer women than men hold senior-level positions in academic medicine and, therefore, examining publication trends relative to gender is important. The goal of this study was to examine and compare publication trends in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) and The Bone and Joint Journal (BJJ) with a particular emphasis on trends regarding author gender. Data was collected and analyzed for manuscripts published in JBJS and BJJ over the past 30 years. For manuscripts published in 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016, we recorded the numbers of authors, manuscript pages, references, collaborating institutions, the position in the byline of the corresponding author, the country of the corresponding author, and the names of the first and corresponding author. We also calculated the normalized number of citations and corresponding author position. The number of authors, institutions, and countries collaborating on manuscripts published in both JBJS and BJJ increased over time. JBJS published more manuscripts from North America and BJJ published more manuscripts from Europe. In both journals, the percentage of women as first and/or corresponding author increased over time. Trends over the past 30 years have shown increased collaborations with greater citations in manuscripts published in JBJS and BJJ. In the same time period, both journals demonstrated a rise in the percentage of manuscripts with women first and/or corresponding authors, suggesting a decrease in the gender gap.

A Bibliometric Study of Authorship and Collaboration Trends Over the Past 30 Years in Four Major Musculoskeletal Science Journals

This study explored changes in bibliometric variables over the last 30 years for four major musculoskeletal science journals (BONE®), Calcified Tissue International® (CTI®), Journal of Bone and Mineral Research® (JBMR®), and Journal of Orthopaedic Research® (JOR®), with a specific focus on author gender. Bibliometric data were collected for all manuscripts in 1985 (BONE®, CTI®, JOR®), 1986 (JBMR®), 1995, 2005, and 2015; 2776 manuscripts met inclusion criteria. Manuscripts from Europe were more often published in BONE® or CTI®, while those from North America in JBMR® or JOR®. All journals demonstrated an increase over time in the number of authors (3.67-7.3), number of countries (1.1-1.4), number of institutions (1.4-3.1), and number of references (25.1-45.4). The number of manuscript pages increased (6.6-8.9) except for JOR® which showed a decline. CTI® had the lowest number of authors (4.9 vs. 5.6-6.8). There was a change in the corresponding author position from first to last for all journals; this change was highest for CTI® (35%) and lowest for BONE® (14.0%). All journals demonstrated an increase over time in female authors; however, CTI® was the highest amongst these four journals. The percentage of female first authors rose from 24.6 to 44.3% (CTI® 29.1-52.3%). The percentage of corresponding female authors rose from 17.5 to 33.6% (CTI® 22.9-40.0%). The proportion of female authors is increasing, likely reflecting the increasing number of women obtaining doctorates in science, medicine, and engineering.