Scientific research output in orthopaedics from China and other top-ranking countries: a 10-year survey of the literature

Rise of Asian research in orthopaedic and sports medicine: a bibliometric analysis from 1996 to 2022

OBJECTIVES

This study examines the growth and impact of orthopaedic and sports medicine (OSM) publications across 30 Asian countries from 1996 to 2022 using a bibliometric (scientometric) approach. Despite Asia's rising academic achievements, prior studies have not comprehensively mapped publication trends in this field across the region. This analysis aims to perform bibliometric analysis in OSM research in the Asian Countries.

METHODS

Publication data were sourced from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank portal, derived from the SCOPUS database, covering the period from 1996 to 2022, with updates available until April 2023. The analysis focused on the top Asian countries and included key indicators such as H-index and total citations to assess research impact.

RESULTS

The study identified a substantial rise in OSM publications from Asia, with total output increasing 14.27-fold-compared to a 5.54-fold increase globally. Between 1996 and 2022, 111,342 OSM publications originated from Asian countries, out of 666,847 globally. However, citation counts for Asian research declined from 26,263 in 1996 to 6020 in 2022, likely reflecting the time-lag effect in citation accumulation for recent publications. Possible contributing factors are discussed.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights a remarkable surge in orthopaedic and sports medicine publications from Asia, surpassing global growth trends. While citation metrics appear lower in recent years-likely due to the recency of publications-the overall trend suggests a strong and growing research in Asia. China and Japan lead in output and impact, respectively, while India's rapid rise reflects increasing academic potential. However, enhancing research quality and visibility and reducing self-citation are essential to elevate global impact. Countries like Hong Kong, Singapore, and Sri Lanka demonstrate high citation efficiency. With optimal collaboration and strategic investment, Asian countries are well positioned to play a leading role in global orthopaedic research.

Coronavirus disease-2019 and orthopedics: A bibliometric analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a dramatic impact on global health, with orthopedics among the most affected specialties. An increasing number of COVID-19-related orthopedic studies have been published. The purpose of this study was to analyze the orthopedic literature published during the COVID-19 pandemic to guide future research.

METHODS

The Scopus database was searched for relevant literature published between 2020 and 2022. The keywords used in the retrieval process were ("COVID-19" OR "Coronavirus" OR "2019-nCoV" OR "SARS-CoV-2" OR "Betacoronavirus" OR "novel coronavirus 2019" OR "novel coronavirus" OR "coronavirus-19" OR "COVID 19" OR "nCOV" OR "COVID-2019" OR "COVID 2019") and ("orthopedic" OR "orthopedics" OR "orthopedic" OR "orthopedical" OR "orthopedical" OR "orthopedics"). Spreadsheet software (Excel, Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) was used to analyze the top 10 cited authors, countries, journals, and articles. The top 5 publication types were also analyzed. VOSviewer (Center for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden, Netherlands) was used to network and visualize the literature.

RESULTS

A total of 1619 publications relevant to COVID-19 and orthopedics were reviewed. Among these publications, the most active country, author, and publication type included the United States, Vaishya R, and original articles, respectively. The most frequently used keywords were human, coronavirus disease-2019, pandemic, and orthopedics. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume was the most cited journal, whereas the greatest number of articles was published in the Journal of Clinical Orthopedics and Trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a perspective on the development of orthopedic publications during the COVID-19 pandemic and evidence for researchers worldwide to strengthen global cooperation in fighting the epidemic.

Scientific publications on orthopedic surgery from three major East Asian countries (2012-2021)

BACKGROUND

East Asia is the most dynamic region in the world and includes three major countries: Japan, South Korea and China. Due to rapid economic growth, orthopedics research in East Asia has achieved great advances during the past 10 years. However, the current status of orthopedic research in Japan, South Korea and China is still unclear.

AIM

To understand the current status of orthopedic research in Japan, South Korea, and China.

METHODS

Journals listed in the ''Orthopedics'' category of Science Citation Index Expanded subject categories were included. The PubMed and Web of Knowledge electronic databases were searched to identify scientific publications from the selected journals written by researchers from Japan, South Korea and China. A systematic analysis was conducted to analyze orthopedic research articles published in the three countries based on the number of articles, study design, impact factors (IFs) and citations. Furthermore, we also ranked the top 10 countries worldwide with the highest publications in the past 10 years. Additionally, we ranked the top 10 countries with the highest number of publications in the world in the past 10 years. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 20.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, United States), and statistical results are given in Tables and Figures. The Kruskal-Wallis test and the Mann-Whitney test were used to detect differences between countries. The tendency regarding the number of articles was analyzed by curvilinear regression. A two-tailed P < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

From 2012-2021, a total of 144518 articles were published in the 86 selected orthopedic journals. During this period, the number of worldwide published orthopedic articles has shown an annual increasing trend. A total of 27164 orthopedic research articles were published by Japan, South Korea and China during the past 10 years; 44.32% were from China, 32.98% were from Japan, and 22.70% were from South Korea. From 2012 to 2021, the annual number of articles markedly increased in each of the three countries. Over time, the worldwide share of articles increased substantially in South Korea (3.37% to 6.53%, P < 0.001) and China (5.29% to 9.61%, P < 0.001). However, the worldwide share of articles significantly decreased in Japan (5.22% to 3.80%, P < 0.001). The annual total IFs of articles from China were well above those of articles from Japan and South Korea (36597.69 vs 27244.48 vs 20657.83, P < 0.05). There was no significant difference among the articles in the top 10 high-IF orthopedics journals published from those three countries [South Korea (800) > China (787) > Japan (646), P > 0.05].

CONCLUSION

Over the past 10 years, China's scientific publications in orthopedic journals have shown an increasing trend. Considering the relative scale of the populations, Japan and South Korea have outpaced China with respect to quality.

An Empirical Study on the Landscape of Mining and Mineral Processing (MMP) With Big Data

Over the last two decades, mining and mineral processing (MMP) has changed dramatically. Little is known about the bibliometric analysis of MMP. To this end, this study used the big data analysis to investigate the quantity and quality of scientific outputs in MMP over the past 21-year timespan. This study used IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0 and VOSviewer software to research on the 20 journals from Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded) of Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC). VOSviewer software was used to identify the visualization contributions of scientific outputs over 21-year timespan. Totally, the big data analysis shows people of China have the highest cumulative IFs, but their mean IFs are relatively low and are ranked in fourth place. Visually, people of Chin ranked the first in total link strength (2967), but not in links (86), which is the third place among Top15 countries. From the perspective of quality, it cannot rank the first. Thus, people of China should put more effort into improving the quality of scientific outputs.

Changing trends in clinical research literature on PubMed database from 1991 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Clinical research publications have become the dominant source and basis of clinical evidence-based decision-making. Exploring the type and quantity of clinical research publications in the PubMed database is useful for clarifying the changing trends of clinical research development in recent years. Therefore, a longitudinal analysis of the type and quantity of clinical research publications in the PubMed database over three decades was conducted.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched to retrieve clinical research according to the type and year of publication from January 1, 1991 to December 31, 2020. The research types were classified as primary and secondary literature.

RESULTS

A total of 1,078,404 primary literatures were retrieved and the constituent proportions were ranked from high to low as case report/series (27.54%), randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (23.62%), cohort studies (21.05%), cross-sectional studies (17.49%), case control studies (9.15%), non-RCTs (1.01%), and pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) (0.15%). Correspondingly, 1,302,173 secondary literatures were retrieved and ranked as narrative review (70.88%), systematic review (15.02%), systematic review and meta-analyses (13.89%), traditional meta-analyses (4.48%), expert consensus (2.31%), guidelines (1.49%), scoping reviews (0.68%), net meta-analyses (0.40%), and umbrella reviews (0.04%). The average annual growth rate for the primary literature was 10.28%, and ranked from high to low as PCTs (83.68%), cohort studies (17.74%), cross-sectional studies (17.61%), non-RCTs (12.11%), case control studies (8.86%), RCTs (7.68%), case report/series (7.51%); while that for the secondary literature was 10.57%, and ranked from high to low as net meta-analyses (48.97%), umbrella reviews (47.09%), scoping reviews (41.92%), systematic reviews and meta-analyses (33.44%), systematic reviews (33.05%), traditional meta-analyses (12.49%), expert consensuses (9.22%), narrative review (8.72%), and guidelines (2.82%).

CONCLUSION

Both the composition and number of clinical studies changed significantly from 1991 to 2020. Based on the trend, the case report/series, case control study, and narrative review are on the decline, while cohort study, cross-sectional study, systematic reviews, and systematic review and meta-analysis literature have increased. To improve the quality of clinical evidence, we recommend RCT and cohort study give priority to access to allocated research resources in future.

Analysis of Publication Trends in Childhood Obesity Research in PubMed Since 1945

Background: Childhood obesity (CO) has become a true epidemic and a subject of increasing publications. The aim of this study was to assess if the number of publications in that field increases over time in proportion to the epidemic, and also according to socioeconomic factors. Methods: A PubMed search was carried out to extract articles related to CO published between 1945 and 2017. Data were downloaded from PubMed and processed through a dedicated parser. Socioeconomic data were collected from international organizations. Results: Overall, 36,554 articles were retrieved among 3329 journals, one-third of them being concentrated in 44 journals. The annual growth rate of publications on CO was on average 11.6% per year between 1990 and 2016, whereas the growth rate of articles on pediatrics or of the total articles indexed in MEDLINE was 2.6% and 4.4%, respectively. The most productive countries were the United States (37.80%), the United Kingdom (6.24%), and Italy (4.56%). There was a significant relationship between publications on CO in a country and prevalence of CO in that country (p = 0.002) and between evolution of the number of publications and evolution of the Human Development Index (p = 0.01). Following exponential growth, CO publications reached a plateau in 2013, whereas publications targeted on obesity in infants continue to increase. Conclusions: Research on CO has risen markedly in the last two decades, with a higher growth rate than biomedical research overall, as a result of the worldwide obesity epidemic and also due to specific socioeconomic factors.

Clinicians’ Publication Output: Self-Report Survey and Bibliometric Analysis

The uncertainties around disease management and control measures have not only motivated clinicians to keep abreast of new evidence available in the scholarly literature, but also to be rigorously engaged in medical research, dissemination and knowledge transfer. We aimed to explore clinicians’ publication output from the Malaysian perspective. A self-report survey and bibliometric analysis was conducted. A total of 201/234 clinicians participated in the survey. Items consisted of demographics, researching habits, publication output and level of importance of journal selection metrics. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. Bibliometric analysis using retrieved records from PubMed between 2009 and October 2019 was conducted and co-occurrence and co-authorship analyses were executed. Self-reported publication output was 16.9%. In the logistic regression model, publication output was significantly higher amongst consultants or clinical specialists (aOR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.1–10.0, p = 0.023); clinicians previously involved in research (aOR = 4.2, 95% CI 1.5–11.4, p = 0.004); clinicians who ever used reference citation managers (aOR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.3–7.7, p = 0.010); and journal publication speed (aOR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.2–7.1, p = 0.019). Most clinicians published original research papers (76.4%) in international journals (78.2%). Published papers were mostly observational studies, genetic, stroke and health services or systems research. In conclusion, socio-demographics, researching habits and journal selection metrics were significantly associated with self-reported publication output. Real outputs from bibliometrics were predominantly focused across five clusters.

Job satisfaction, engagement, and burnout in the population of orthopedic surgeon and neurosurgeon trainees in mainland China

OBJECTIVE

In China, orthopedics and neurosurgery are among the most desired majors for medical students. However, little is known about the working and living status of specialists in these two fields. This study was aimed at evaluating job satisfaction, engagement, and burnout in the population of Chinese orthopedist and neurosurgeon trainees.

METHODS

A nationwide online survey was administered in mainland China. Questionnaires were answered anonymously. Job satisfaction, engagement, and burnout were assessed using the Job Descriptive Index, the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, and the Maslach Burnout Inventory, respectively.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 643 orthopedist trainees and 690 neurosurgeon trainees. Orthopedists and neurosurgeons showed no statistical difference in terms of age, sex, job titles, and preference for working in tertiary hospitals. Orthopedists had a higher marriage rate (p < 0.01), a lower divorce rate (p = 0.017), relatively shorter working hours (p < 0.01), and a higher annual income (p = 0.023) than neurosurgeons. Approximately 40% of respondents experienced workplace violence in the last 5 years. Less than 10% of respondents were satisfied with their pay, and over 70% would not encourage their offspring to become a doctor. Orthopedists were more satisfied with their careers than neurosurgeons (p < 0.01) and had a higher level of work engagement (p < 0.01). In addition, a higher proportion of orthopedists were burnt out (p < 0.01) than neurosurgeons, though the difference between the two groups was not significant (p = 0.088). Multivariate regressions suggested that younger age (≤ 25 years old), being a senior trainee, getting divorced, working in a regional hospital, long working hours (≥ 71 hrs/wk), a low annual income (<¥100,000), sleeping < 6 hrs/day, and experience with workplace violence were significantly related to burnout for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese orthopedic surgical and neurosurgical trainees are under significant stress. Orthopedic surgeons showed relatively optimistic data in their assessments of job satisfaction, engagement, and burnout. This study may provide valuable information for orthopedic and neurosurgical candidates considering either specialty as a career.

Bibliometric evaluation of orthopaedics and traumatology publications from France: 20-year trends (1998-2017) and international positioning

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the scientific publication output for individual countries and medical specialties. The contribution of French authors to the currently expanding volume of publications on orthopaedics and traumatology (OT) is unclear. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR) is an English-language version of a preexisting French journal that was launched in 2009 to increase the dissemination of research done in France. The objective of this study was to use Web of Science (WoS) data from 1998 to 2017 to determine (i) the contribution of OT publications to the total worldwide volume of scientific publications, (ii) the contribution of OT publications from France to the total worldwide volume of OT publications, and (iii) changes over time in the proportion of OT publications from France with special attention to potential effects of the creation of OTSR.

HYPOTHESIS

The proportion of OT publications from France increased after 2010-2012, indicating a positive effect of OTSR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

WoS data were used to identify original studies and review articles written by at least one French author, published between 1998 and 2017, and dealing with OT (defined as orthopaedics and/or traumatology in adult and/or paediatric patients). The worldwide volumes of publications in OT and other specialties were compared. Within worldwide OT publications, the proportion from France was determined. Indicators of impact were evaluated during successive 5-year periods. Finally, the position of OT in worldwide research was assessed and OT journals were analysed.

RESULTS

Among worldwide scientific medical publications, the proportion dealing with OT increased year on year from 1.93% in 1998 to 2.65% in 2017. Among annual publications from France, the proportion dealing with OT rose similarly, from 1.32% to 2.40%. Over the 20-year study period, France moved from the sixth to the ninth position, chiefly due to a large increase in publications from Asia. However, France remained in third position among European countries and increased its OT production 3-fold between 1998 and 2017. The proportion of OT articles from France that ranked among the top 1% most cited articles increased by 65% from 2008-2012 (20 articles) to 2013-2017 (33 articles), and the proportion in the top 10% increased by 31.8% (211 in 2008-2012 and 278 in 2013-2017). This rate of progression was faster than in any of the other western countries. Between 1998-2011 and 2012-2017, the contribution of French OT to publication output showed a 1.56-fold greater increase than did the contribution of OT to the worldwide volume of scientific medical publications.

DISCUSSION

OT publications from France have kept pace with the steady increase seen worldwide over the last 20years. Although the US and UK remain in the lead, and despite the considerable growth in the output of Asian countries, France occupies a prominent position on the international OT scene. The creation of OTSR has elevated the international profile of French OT centres.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study with no control group.

Assessment of Korea's Orthopedic Research Activities in the Top 15 Orthopedic Journals, 2008-2017

Background

Bibliometrics is increasingly used to assess the quantity and quality of scientific research output in many research fields worldwide. This study aims to update Korea's worldwide research productivity in the field of orthopedics using bibliometric methods and to provide Korean surgeons and researchers with insights into such research.

Methods

Articles published in the top 15 orthopedic journals between 2008 and 2017 were retrieved using the Web of Science. The number of articles, citations and h-index (Hirsch index), funding sources, institutions, and journal patterns were analyzed.

Results

Of the total 39,494 articles, Korea's contribution accounted for 5.6% (2,161 articles), ranking fifth in the world in the number of publications. Korea ranked sixth (with 29,456) for total citations worldwide but ranked 17th (13.64) in terms of average citation per item and 14th (55) in terms of h-index. Korea showed the most prolific productivity in the field of sports medicine and arthroscopy. The institution that produced the highest number of publications was Seoul National University (n = 386, 17.9%).

Conclusions

Orthopedic research in South Korea demonstrated high productivity in terms of the number of publications in high-quality journals between 2008 and 2017. However, total citations and average citations per article were still relatively low. Efforts should be made to increase citation rates for further improvement in research productivity in the field of orthopedics.

Bibliometric analysis of scientific publications in rheumatology journals from China and other top-ranking countries between 2007 and 2017

Objectives

Rheumatology-related diseases remain a significant burden worldwide. However, little is known about the comparative status of rheumatology research between Mainland China (MC) and the world’s leading countries. The aim of this study is to compare the quantity and quality of research output in the field of rheumatology that were written by researchers from MC, the USA, the UK, the Netherlands and France.

Methods

Between 2007 and 2017, all articles published in 30 rheumatology journals were identified via Science Citation Index Expanded database. The number of total and annual articles, article types (randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reviews, case reports, clinical trials and meta-analysis), impact factor (IF), citations, h-index and articles in the high-impact journals were collected for quantity and quality comparisons. The correlation of socioeconomic factors and annual publications was also analyzed.

Results

From 2007 to 2017, there were 53,439 articles published in rheumatology journals, of which researchers from the USA published 13,391 articles, followed by the UK, the Netherlands, France and MC with 6,179, 4,310, 4,066 and 2,898 articles, respectively. Publications from MC represented the ninth, but the number is growing rapidly. For total and average citations, MC still lags behind the other four countries in the study. Similar trends were observed in average IF, h-index and articles in the high-impact journals. In terms of article types, the USA occupies the dominant place, except for meta-analysis. The annual numbers of articles from MC and the USA were positively correlated with gross domestic product (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The USA has played predominant role in rheumatology research for the last 11 years. The annual number of published articles from MC has increased notably from 2007 to 2017. Although MC has made progress in the number of published articles over the past decade, it still lags far behind the highly developed countries in most bibliometric indicators. Thus, the general quality of publications from MC needs further improvement.

Quality of randomized controlled trials of new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics identified in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI): a literature and telephone interview study

Background

We are witnessing an exponential increase in the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported from mainland China. The increase is particularly notable in the field of new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics. Several previous studies have raised doubts regarding their quality. However, the quality of most recent RCTs published in China may have improved.

Methods

We searched RCTs that examined new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics published between 2013 and 2016 in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the largest database of scientific publications in China. We interviewed the authors of a random subset of the identified references. We assessed the methodological rigor of each study based on the published reports and telephone interviews with the authors using six methodological domains adapted from the Cochrane’s risk of bias tool.

Results

The final sample consisted of 138 studies, for which we interviewed 58 authors; the authors of 51 studies declined the interview, and the authors of 29 studies could not be contacted. The 51 studies with refused interviews were significantly less likely to be reported from university-affiliated hospitals and were less likely to be published in Chinese core journals. Based on the published reports, most of the 58 studies were assessed to be at unclear risk of bias in most methodological domains. After the interview, only 10 studies were assessed to be at low risk of bias for sequence generation and allocation concealment. Assuming that the studies for which the authors declined interviews had an unclear risk, the proportion of RCTs at low risk of bias in both sequence generation and allocation concealment was 9.2% (10/109, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.0 to 16.2). The interviews indicated that the studies were at high risk of bias for most of the other domains.

Conclusion

In general, RCTs that evaluate new generation antidepressants or antipsychotics and are indexed in the CNKI continue to be of low quality. When conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this field, it would be wise to include a specialist from China as a coresearcher to help assess the risk of bias in the identified studies.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-018-0554-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Otorhinolaryngology publication from Chinese authors: a 11-year survey of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Scientific publication is the reflection of the capability of not only an individual scholar, but also a group, even a country. Over the past few decades, Chinese researchers have made great progress in medical scientific field. However, the status about the quantity and quality of the publications in otorhinolaryngology have not been reported. The aim of this study was to compare the output by Chinese authors from three regions of China: Mainland China (MC), Taiwan (TW) and Hong Kong (HK).

METHODS

Literature was retrieved from the 43 otorhinolaryngology journals based on the subject category 'otorhinolaryngology' of the Science Citation Index Expanded (2015) from Web of Science Core Collection. The first authors of these articles were limited in three regions of China: MC, TW and HK from 2006 to 2016 by using the data mining software Thomson Data Analyzer (TDA). Evaluation criteria are based on total number of articles, impact factors (IFs), citations, articles published in high-impact journals and funding support.

RESULT

A total of 59,832 articles were published worldwide in 43 otorhinolaryngology related journals from 2006 to 2016. Publications from MC was rapidly increasing and the total number contributed the most articles of the China (1931/3362, 57.44%), followed by TW (1220/3362, 36.29%) and HK (211/3362, 6.28%). The quantity of annual publications from MC has exceeded that of TW since 2010. MC was in the first place for cumulative IFs, but the last place for average IF. For total and average citations, MC was in the same situation of IF. Acta Otolaryngol was the most popular journal to choose in MC, and for TW and HK was Head & Neck.

CONCLUSIONS

The total number of otorhinolaryngology articles in China increased markedly from 2006 to 2016, especially for MC. Despite the rapid growth in the number of articles from MC, the quality was not that satisfactory.