Institution Origin and Medical School Rank Impact the Citation Frequency and Publication Rate in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Journals

Predictive value of medical school ranking in the academic scholarship of ophthalmology residents

Objective

To determine whether a resident's medical school ranking predicts their scholarship during residency.

Design

The authors stratified ophthalmology residents in ACGME accredited programs into tiers based off their medical school background's US News & World Report ranking: T1 (schools 1-20), T2 (21-50), and T3 (51-90). Investigators queried PubMed and Scopus for number of total publications, first/second author publications, publications in the top 10 impact factor journals in ophthalmology, and publications with the senior author affiliated with the resident's residency program/medical school. Authors collected data from start of ophthalmology residency to December 5th, 2021, and performed Pearson chi squared, ANOVA, Eta squared, Tukey, and multivariable logistic regression tests.

Results

1054 residents were included for analysis, with 370 from T1 schools, 296 from T2 schools, and 388 from T3 schools. T3 residents had a significantly decreased likelihood of publishing at least one (OR = 0.659;95%CI = 0.481,0.905;p = .010), two (OR = 0.643;95%CI = 0.436,0.949;p = .026), or five (OR = 0.407;95%CI = 0.187,0.886;p = .024) total publications compared to T1 residents. T3 residents also were partially predicted to publish fewer first author works, high impact journal articles, and articles with senior authors affiliated with their medical school. T2 residents were more likely to publish at least one second author work than T1 residents (OR = 1.604;95%CI = 1.101,2.337;p = .014). There was no significant difference between tiers in publications with senior authors affiliated with the same residency program.

Conclusions

The authors observed little difference in scholarship between residents from T1 and T2 schools, but some differences may exist between T3 and T1/T2 residents. Merit of rankings should be further explored.

A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty

Background

The use of robotics in arthroplasty surgery has increased substantially in recent years. The purpose of this study was to objectively identify the 100 most influential studies in the robotic arthroplasty literature and to conduct a bibliometric analysis of these studies to describe their key characteristics.

Methods

The Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database was used to gather data and metrics for robotic arthroplasty research using Boolean queries. The search list was sorted in descending order by the number of citations, and articles were included or excluded based on clinical relevance to robotic arthroplasty.

Results

The top 100 studies were cited a total of 5770 times from 1997 to 2021, with rapid growth in both citation generation and the number of articles published occurring in the past 5 years. The top 100 robotic arthroplasty articles originated from 12 countries, with the United States being responsible for almost half of the top 100. The most common study types were comparative studies (36) followed by case series (20), and the most common levels of evidence were III (23) and IV (33).

Conclusions

Research on robotic arthroplasty is rapidly growing and originates from a wide variety of countries, academic institutions, and with significant industry influence. This article serves as a reference to direct orthopaedic practitioners to the 100 most influential studies in robotic arthroplasty. We hope that these 100 studies and the analysis we provide aid healthcare professionals in efficiently assessing consensus, trends, and needs within the field.

Social Media Impact of Articles Published by Dermatology Residents During Medical School: Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The Altmetric score (AS) is a novel measure of publication impact that is calculated by the number of mentions across various social media websites. This method may have advantages over traditional bibliometrics in the context of research by medical students.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether dermatology matriculants who graduated from higher-ranked medical schools published more articles with greater impact (ie, a higher AS) than those from lower-ranked institutions.

METHODS

A PubMed search for articles published by dermatology residents who started medical school in 2020 was conducted. Demographic information and Altmetric data were collected, and medical schools were sorted according to US News' top-25 and non-top-25 categories.

RESULTS

Residents who completed their medical training at a top-25 institution published more papers (mean 4.93, SD 4.18 vs mean 3.11, SD 3.32; P<.001) and accrued a significantly higher total AS (mean 67.9, SD 160 vs mean 22.9, SD 75.9; P<.001) and average AS (mean 13.1, SD 23.7 vs mean 6.71, SD 32.3; P<.001) per article than those who graduated from non-top-25 schools.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that students in top-25 schools may have greater access to research resources and opportunities. With a pass/fail United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 exam that may increasingly shift focus toward scholarly output from medical students, further discussion on how to create a more equitable dermatology match is essential.