"How many cardiac surgeons does it take to write a research article?": seventy years of authorship proliferation and internationalization in the cardiothoracic surgical literature

Mega-authorship implications: How many scientists can fit into one cell?

The past 20 years has seen a significant increase in articles with 500 or more authors. This increase has presented problems in terms of determining true authorship versus other types of contribution, issues with database metadata and data output, and publication length. Using items with 500+ authors deemed as mega-author titles, a total of 5,533 mega-author items were identified using InCites. Metadata about the items was then gathered from Web of Science and Scopus. Close examination of these items found that the vast majority of these covered physics topics, with medicine a far distant second place and only minor representation from other science fields. This mega-authorship saw significant events that appear to correspond to similar events in the Large Hadron Collider's timeline, indicating that the projects for the collider are driving this heavy output. Some solutions are offered for the problems resulting from this phenomenon, partially driven by recommendations from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.

How Many Plastic Surgeons Does It Take to Write an Article? A 10-Year Bibliometric Analysis of Authorship Inflation

BACKGROUND

Publications measure academic productivity; they can affect research funding and career trajectory. There is a trend of increased authors per publication in surgery journals. We sought to determine whether authorship inflation exists in the plastic surgery literature and identify independent predictors of the number of co-authors.

METHODS

We performed a bibliometric analysis of articles published in 3 high impact plastic surgery journals at 2-year intervals between 2010 and 2020. For each publication, we collected details on year of publication, article type, plastic surgery topic, gender of senior author, geographical origin of study, and the number of authors.

RESULTS

A total of 5593 articles were collected. The median number of authors per article increased over time (ρ = 0.20, P < 0.001). Cohort studies, basic science investigations, literature reviews, and systematic reviews experienced a significant increase in the number of authors per article from 2010 to 2020 (P < 0.001). The rise in the number of authors was consistent across all plastic surgery topics (P < 0.001). Both male and female senior authors had a significant increase in the number of co-authors (P < 0.001). The regression model demonstrated that article type (cohort studies, basic science investigations, and systematic reviews) predicted more co-authors, whereas geographical region (Africa, Middle East, South and Southeast Asia, and United Kingdom and Ireland) and plastic surgery topics (aesthetic and hand surgery) predicted fewer authors.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of authors per publication is increasing in plastic surgery. Author proliferation was consistent across most article types and unaffected by gender. Possible reasons behind this trend include research complexity, increased collaboration, or gift authorship.

A comprehensive analysis of authorship trends in Skeletal Radiology since inception from 1976 to 2020

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to explore authorship trends within the musculoskeletal radiology subspecialty-focused journal, Skeletal Radiology, from inception to 2020.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Skeletal Radiology articles published in 1976, 1986, 1996, 2006, 2016, and 2020 were reviewed. For each article, the number of authors, the number of distinct institutions, the names of first and last authors, the country of the first author, the article length, and the number of article references were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 885 articles passed the exclusion criteria to be included in the study. Since inception, there has been a significant increase in the number of SR articles published (P = 0.02), the mean number of authors per article (P < 0.01), the mean number of references per article (P < 0.01), the mean number of distinct institutions per article (P = 0.02), and the mean number of pages per article (P < 0.01). The proportion of female first and last authors significantly increased (P = 0.02, P = 0.02). There was a significant increase in the proportion of articles published from Asia (P = 0.04). However, no significant changes in the proportion of articles published from other regions were observed.

CONCLUSION

Similar to authorship trends in other medical journals, Skeletal Radiology demonstrated upward trends in authorship count, distinct institutional count, and article length. A rise in first and last female authorship was observed. Finally, an increase in the proportion of authors from Asia was observed while no significant changes in the proportion of authors from other regions were demonstrated.

Authorship trends in the Egyptian orthopedic journal (from 2012 to 2020), as an example of a specialized Egyptian medical journals

Background

Authorship trends in medical journals were studied in many disciplines, mostly in western countries' journals. We aimed at studying the authorship trends in the Egyptian Orthopaedic Journal as an example of a specialized Egyptian medical journal.

Results

A total of 397 articles were eligible for analysis. The mean number of authors per article was 2 ± 1 (range from 1 to 6), 161 (40.6%) articles were single authorship. The degree of the first author was reported in 305 (76.6%), the first author carried an M.D. degree in 302 (99%) articles, and in three (1%), the first author carried a master’s degree. No authors with a bachelor's degree were reported. Forty-two institutions contributed to the publications, 14 (33.3%) international and 28 (66.7%) Egyptian national institutions. In 368 (92.7%) articles, all the authors were from the same institution, and 29 (7.3%) articles were published as a cooperation between different institutions with a mean 1.1 ± 0.3 institution per article. International contribution to the journal was found in 21 (5.3%) articles. The orthopedic department from Cairo university was the most contributing department to the journal publications.

Conclusions

The old trend of single authorship prevails in the journal publications with a notable deficiency in young researchers’ contribution to the journal and low incidence of international contribution and poor national institution cooperation.

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.

Ten Years of Sports Health: Authorship Characteristics and Levels of Evidence

CONTEXT

Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach, now 10 years into production, has been ranked a top-25 journal in sport sciences and has tripled its impact throughout its existence.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate authorship trends and levels of evidence (LOE) of articles published in Sports Health from 2009 to 2018. The secondary aim was to analyze funding sources and internationalization throughout the journal's tenure.

DATA SOURCES

All clinical studies published in Sports Health between the years 2009 and 2018 were examined.

STUDY SELECTION

All publications from the provided years were electronically reviewed by 2 reviewers and evaluated for inclusion criteria. Editorials, society news, memorials, letters to the editor, and corrigenda were excluded.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5.

DATA EXTRACTION

Articles were examined for number of authors, presence of female authorship, funding, country of origin, international collaboration, academic degree or certification of first and senior authors, and LOE. Clinical articles were assigned LOE based on guidelines from the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

RESULTS

A total of 654 articles were examined. The percentage of high-LOE studies increased throughout the study period. The percentage of publications with female authors also increased throughout the study period. The mean number of authors per article increased from 3.2 to 4.6 over the 10-year period (P < 0.05). The percentage of publications with international collaboration stayed consistent, while the number of countries per year increased during the study period. Overall, institutions from 23 countries have published in Sports Health since its inception to the time of this study.

CONCLUSION

Female authorship in Sports Health surpasses industry standards, and the percentage of high-LOE studies remains remarkably high. Sports Health has stayed true to its multidisciplinary scope, as evidenced by the authors' varying degrees and numerous countries that publish in the journal.

The Archivesof Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at 100: A Century of Authorship

OBJECTIVE

To describe the authors who have contributed articles to the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (APM&R) over the 100 years of its existence.

DESIGN

Extraction of relevant information from a sample of APM&R articles.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 4933 authors contributing to 1787 articles.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number of authors and their gender, professional education, and country of residence.

RESULTS

The average number of authors per article increased from 1.1 in 1922 to 5.8 in 2017. The percentage of women authors grew from <5% to about 40%. In 1922 the majority of authors had an MD degree (85%); this declined to <30% by 2017, while the percentage of authors with a PhD grew from about 10% to about 30%. The percentage of contributors with a bachelor's degree initially was about 1%, grew to 13%, and then declined again. While in APM&R's early years, >90% of authors were from the United States, this percentage went into a steep decline beginning in about 1997 and now is around 35%.

CONCLUSIONS

The APM&R has seen major transformations in the nature of its contributors over a century of publication; many of these parallel the changes seen in other areas of health care and medical science, but some characteristics and shifts (especially in gender and level of training of its authors) appear unique.

Publishing trends in Journal of Paediatric Surgery, Pediatric Surgery International and European Journal of Pediatric Surgery over the past three decades

The aim of this study was an analysis of the changing publication trends over the last three decades in the Journal of Pediatric Surgery (JPS), Pediatric Surgery International (PSI) and European Journal of Pediatric Surgery (EJPS) by studying the bibliometric variables, authorship, collaboration, and citation trends. A previously applied methodology using intermittent years was applied to review the archives of JPS, PSI and EJPS over the last 30 years. Citation data were collected from the Web of Science database. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS 9.4 software. A total of 1917 articles originating from 63 countries met the inclusion criteria. The number of articles published every year increased significantly in the last three decades from 336 in 1987 to 626 in 2017 (P < 0.0001). Multinational papers made up 5% of the total, of which 58% involved more than one continent. A majority of papers (75%) were single institution papers, there was strong evidence of an increase in multi-institution publications over time. There was a statistically significant increase in the number of female first and corresponding author. The publishing landscape of paediatric surgery has evolved to be more inclusive with increased collaboration, female authors and mentors and more publications from developing nations.

Female-Authored Articles Are More Likely to Include Methods-Trained Authors

Objective

Studies with authors trained in research methods are of higher quality than those without. We examined inclusion of authors with master's or doctoral degrees incorporating advanced research methods training on original research articles in high-impact journals, investigating differences between journals and by first-author sex.

Methods

Using all original research articles from 1 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine (Annals), and JAMA-Internal Medicine/Archives of Internal Medicine (Archives) every alternate month, February 1994 to October 2016, we assessed the prevalence of articles listing authors with master's/doctoral research degrees and its adjusted associations with time of publication, journal, and first-author sex via multivariable logistic regression models (accounting for number of authors, study type, specialty/topic, and continent and for interactions between journal and time of publication, study type, and continent).

Results

Of 3009 articles examined, 84.4% (n=2539) had authors listing research degrees. After adjustment, the prevalence of such articles increased from 1994 to 2016 (P<.001), but patterns differed among journals. Annals and NEJM increased to approximately100% by 2016; JAMA and Archives peaked around 2010 to 2011, then declined. Articles with female first authors were more likely to list authors with research degrees (adjusted odds ratio=1.66; 95% CI, 1.29-2.13; P<.001).

Conclusion

The prevalence of original research articles listing authors trained in research methods in high-impact journals increased significantly but is now declining at some journals, with potential effects on quality. The greater prevalence among female first-authored articles suggests possible sex differences in structuring/crediting research teams or subconscious sex bias during review.

Responsibility for scientific misconduct in collaborative papers

This paper concerns the responsibility of co-authors in cases of scientific misconduct. Arguments in research integrity guidelines and in the bioethics literature concerning authorship responsibilities are discussed. It is argued that it is unreasonable to claim that for every case where a research paper is found to be fraudulent, each author is morally responsible for all aspects of that paper, or that one particular author has such a responsibility. It is further argued that it is more constructive to specify what task responsibilities come with different roles in a project and describe what kinds of situations or events call for some kind of action, and what the appropriate actions might be.

Level of evidence and authorship trends of clinical studies in knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy, 1995-2015

PURPOSE

There is increasing emphasis on publication quality and internationalization of author groups in orthopaedic literature. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the type of studies and the level of evidence (LOE) published in knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy (KSSTA) from 1995 to 2015. The secondary aim was to analyze trends in authorship characteristics in KSSTA.

METHODS

Two reviewers reviewed the table of contents of KSSTA and identified original papers from 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. The reviewers graded LOE from Levels I to IV using guidelines from the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For each article, the total number of authors and country of author group were also analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 880 papers were analyzed. The proportions in LOE have stayed consistent throughout the study period (n.s.). There has been a significant increase in the number of published articles and the number of Level I and II studies (P < 0.01). Therapeutic articles were the most common type. The mean number of authors per KSSTA article significantly increased from 3.9 to 5.7 over the 20-year period (P < 0.01). The number of represented countries increased yearly and academic institutions from 40 different nationalities published articles in the Journal. Of the examined years, the percent of articles with international collaboration was 17.6%.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of LOE I and II articles published in KSSTA remains consistently high. Therapeutic studies are the most frequently published articles. There is an increase in international groups publishing in KSSTA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Authorship Trends in 30 Years of the Journal of Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

While various studies have investigated trends in characteristics of authors in other medical literature, no study has examined these characteristics in the field of arthroplasty.

METHODS

A database was created of all articles published in The Journal of Arthroplasty in 1986, 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. Degree(s) of authors, number of authors, number of references, and region of institution were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 1343 original articles were assessed over the study period. There was a significant increase in the number of authors per publication from 3.45 in 1986 to 4.98 in 2015 (P < .001) and number of references per article from 17.36 to 29.76 (P < .001). There was a significant increase in proportion of first authors with a bachelor's degree (P = .001), MD/PhD (P < .001), and MD/MBA (P = .016), with a significant decrease in first authors with an MD degree only (P < .001). There was a significant increase in number of last authors with an MD/PhD (P = .001) and MD/MBA (P = .003). There has been a significant growth in papers from outside North America (P = .007), with a decrease in articles from the UK/Ireland (P = .003) and an increase in contributions from the Far East (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Trends of authorship characteristics in the arthroplasty literature largely mirror those seen in other medical literature including increased number of authors per article over time, changes in author qualifications, and increased contributions from international author groups.

Progression of Authorship of Scientific Articles in The Journal of Hand Surgery, 1985-2015

PURPOSE

For scientists, authorship is academic currency. Authorship characteristics have been studied in a subset of the surgical and medical literature, but trends in the specialty of hand surgery have not yet been investigated. Specifically, a longitudinal analysis of number, educational training, sex, and geographical origin of authors has not been conducted. We explored the progression of authorship of scientific articles in a leading hand surgery journal.

METHODS

We recorded number of authors, number of references, degrees, and sex of the first and senior authors as well as geographical origin of the corresponding author in The Journal of Hand Surgery in 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015. All original work was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 892 articles were reviewed. The mean number of authors per article increased significantly from 2.6 in 1985 to 3.9 in 2015 and the number of references increased significantly from 13.7 in 1985 to 22.6 in 2015. There was a significant increase in the proportion of first authors with an MD/PhD, PhD, master's or bachelor's degree since 1985. During that same time period, a decrease in the proportion of first authors who held solely an MD was seen. There was a significant increase in proportion of the number of last authors with an MD/PhD, PhD or Master's degree in that same time period. There has been significant growth in publications originating from the "Far East" and "Other" regions, with 4.2% and 5.0% of publications, respectively, in 1985 having increased to 10.3% and 7.4% of publications, respectively, in 2015. Female first authorship significantly increased over the study period from 7.9% in 1985 to 22.1% of publications in 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a significant increase in number of authors per article in The Journal of Hand Surgery. Similar to other studies, we noted shifts in the degrees most commonly held by authors, an increase in references per article, and a greater representation of international authors in the hand surgery. In addition, the proportion of manuscripts written by female authors has increased in the past 30 years, with the largest increase occurring between 2005 and 2015.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This manuscript strives to provide further insight into the changing characteristics of authors contributing to the hand surgery literature. With increased pressure to publish in academia, it is important to understand how publishing author characteristics have evolved over time. In addition, the published literature of a field could be considered one repository of the insights and advancements of the field. One would hope that the authors contributing to that literature are a deep and wide reflection of the people working in that field. Analyzing authorship is one way to assess the breadth and depth of contributions from the profession.

Trends in Authorship Characteristics in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 1994 to 2014

BACKGROUND

Trends in author qualifications, the number of authors per article, and the internationalization of author groups in sports medicine journals have not been widely investigated.

PURPOSE

To examine trends in authorship characteristics in a single prominent sports medicine journal.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Articles published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) in 1994, 2004, and 2014 were reviewed. For each article, the academic degree(s) of the first and last author, the total number of authors, the country of the author group, and academic institution status were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 708 articles met the inclusion criteria: 129 in 1994, 244 in 2004, and 335 in 2014. There were significant differences in the proportion of first authors with an MD degree (80% in 1994, 75% in 2004, 67% in 2014; P = .01), a dual MD/PhD degree (4.7% in 1994, 6.2% in 2004, 9.3% in 2014; P < .001), and a bachelor's degree (0% in 1994, 0% in 2004, 3.9% in 2014; P < .001). The proportion of last authors with an MD/PhD significantly increased over the 2 decades studied (7% in 1994, 13% in 2004, 17% in 2014; P = .01). The mean number of authors per article also significantly increased (3.8 in 1994, 4.3 in 2004, 5.8 in 2014; P < .0001). The proportion of articles published by an international group and the proportion of articles published by an academic institution increased over the 20-year span as well (both P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Within the past 2 decades, there has been a significant increase in the average number of authors per article in AJSM, as well as a higher proportion of international groups and academic institutions publishing in the journal. More nonphysicians are publishing in AJSM, with a significantly higher percentage of first authors with a bachelor's degree as their highest degree. This is likely due to a combination of a general increased interest in research as well as increased competition among medical students. These factors have likely led to larger research groups and thus a significantly higher average number of authors per article.

Worldwide research productivity in the field of spine surgery: a 10-year bibliometric analysis

PURPOSE

Bibliometrics is increasingly used to assess the quantity and quality of scientific research output in many research fields worldwide. However, the bibliometric studies in the field of spine surgery are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the worldwide research productivity in the field of spine surgery using bibliometric methods and to provide an insight into the spine research for surgeons and researchers.

METHODS

Articles published between 2004 and 2013 were retrieved using the Scopus database in 5 spine journals, including Spine, European Spine Journal, The Spine Journal, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, and Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques. The number of articles, trend of publications, countries' contribution and h-index, authorship, subspecialty, funding source, journal pattern, institutions, and top cited articles were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 13,115 publications were identified in the database of Scopus from 2004 to 2013. The time trend of the number of articles showed a significant increase of 1.9-fold between 2004 and 2013 (p = 0.000). The largest number of articles in the field of spine surgery was from United States (39.17%), followed by Japan (10.74%) and China (8.62%). United States also have the highest h-index (106), followed by Canada (60) and United Kingdom (54). China (p = 0.000) and South Korea (p = 0.000) have a significantly increasing trend of contribution proportion to the world spine production over time in years, but h-index was still low (39 and 38, respectively). Spine published the highest number of articles (45.44%), followed by European Spine Journal (21.43%) and Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine (13.32%). The most productive institutions were University of California, San Francisco (1.98%), followed by Thomas Jefferson University (1.61%) and University of Toronto (1.41%).

CONCLUSIONS

There has a rapid increase of scientific research productivity in the field of spine surgery during the past 10 years. United States has special contributions to the body of spine publications. China and South Korea have increasing contributions to the field of spine surgery.

Writers Blocked: On the Wrongs of Research Co-authorship and Some Possible Strategies for Improvement

The various problems associated with co-authorship of research articles have attracted much attention in recent years. We believe that this (hopefully) growing awareness is a very welcome development. However, we will argue that the particular and increasing importance of authorship and the harmful implications of current practices of research authorship for junior researchers have not been emphasised enough. We will use the case of our own research area (bioethics) to illustrate some of the pitfalls of current publishing practices-in particular, the impact on the evaluation of one's work in the area of employment or funding. Even where there are explicit guidelines, they are often disregarded. This disregard, which is often exemplified through the inflation of co-authorship in some research areas, may seem benign to some of us; but it is not. Attribution of co-authorship for reasons other than merit in relation to the publication misrepresents the work towards that publication, and generates unfair competition. We make a case for increasing awareness, for transparency and for more explicit guidelines and regulation of research co-authorship within and across research areas. We examine some of the most sensitive areas of concern and their implications for researchers, particularly junior ones, and we suggest several strategies for future action.

Publication trends in knee surgery: a review of the last 16 years

The trends in the publication of articles regarding knee arthroplasty and soft tissue surgery were analysed with regard to geographical authorship, institutional funding and number of authors. Over 7500 articles from relevant journals with the highest impact factors according to the Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report (2010) were evaluated from 1995 to 2010. The rate of publication increased by 16.9 per year for arthroplasty articles and by 13.9 per year for soft tissue surgery articles. The relative supremacy of the USA has declined over the 16 years, its share dropping from 72.2% to 39.2% for arthroplasty articles and from 61.7% to 36.6% for soft tissue surgery articles. The UK, Japan, South Korea and smaller countries in Asia and South America have become increasingly prolific.

Authorship proliferation in the orthopaedic literature

BACKGROUND

Authorship is the currency of the academic orthopaedic surgeon. There has been an unprecedented increase in the number of authors per publication in many biomedical fields. Possible reasons for this trend include increased complexity of research, "undeserved" authorship, and the "pressure to publish." We explored the change in authorship in two leading orthopaedic journals over a period of sixty years.

METHODS

We examined all original research articles and case reports published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American and British Volumes) (JBJS-A and JBJS-B) in ten-year intervals from 1949 to 2009. For each article, we determined the number of authors, the geographic origin of the research, and the academic degrees of the authors; we also examined the changes that occurred in these categories.

RESULTS

The mean number of authors per original research article increased from 1.6 in 1949 to 5.1 in 2009. There has been a noticeable internationalization of the two journals, with a decreasing proportion of articles from North America and the United Kingdom and Ireland as a result of increased contributions from Europe and the Far East. Authors with advanced research degrees (PhD; MS; MD, PhD; and MD, MS) account for an increasing proportion of contributing authors; over 30% of authors had an advanced research degree in 2009.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the trend of authorship proliferation in biomedical research is also seen in the orthopaedic literature. The mean number of authors, the proportion of authors per research article with an advanced research degree, and variation in the geographic origin of articles has increased over the past sixty years.

An analysis of prosthodontic research productivity: geographic, economic, and collaborative perspective

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the quantity of prosthodontic literature produced globally by continent in three prosthodontic journals over a 10-year period, 1998-2008. Prosthodontic research productivity relative to economic status of countries and collaboration among countries grouped by economic status was assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three peer-reviewed prosthodontic journals were used for the analysis of articles published in 1998, 2003, and 2008: The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, International Journal of Prosthodontics, and Journal of Prosthodontics. The country of every author listed for each included article was recorded. The number of articles published by each continent and each country was reported. Countries were grouped according to the World Bank economic classification system, and the number of articles published by each economic class was found.

RESULTS

The majority of publications over the 10-year period were produced in Asia (Japan), Europe (Germany), and North America (USA). Productivity declined by 14.4% in high-income countries while it increased in upper middle-, lower middle-, and low-income countries. The majority of publications written by upper and lower middle- and low-income countries were independent works. Articles resulting from collaboration increased over time for all economic classes of countries.

CONCLUSIONS

The origins of prosthodontic literature are becoming more geographically and economically diverse, with increased contributions from Africa, Asia, and South America, and middle- and low-income countries between 1998 and 2008. Collaboration between high-income countries and the other economic group countries increased over time.

Authorship, collaboration, and funding trends in implantology literature: analysis of five journals from 2005 to 2009

PURPOSE

To identify the trend of authorship in dental implant by exploring the prevalence of coauthored articles and to investigate the collaboration efforts, trends in funding involved in original articles, and their relationships.

MATERIALS

Articles published in the Clinical Oral Implants Research, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Implant Dentistry, and Journal of Oral Implantology from 2005 to 2009 were reviewed. Nonoriginal articles were excluded. For each included articles, number of authors, collaboration efforts, and extramural funding were recorded. Descriptive and analytical statistics (α = 0.05), including logistic regression analysis and χ² test, were used.

RESULTS

From a total of 2085 articles, 1503 met the inclusion criteria. Publications with 5 or more authors increased over time (P = 0.813). The amount of collaboration among different disciplines, institutions, and countries all increased. The greatest increase of collaboration was seen among institutions (P = 0.09). Nonfunding studies decreased over time (P = 0.031). There was a strong association between collaboration and funding for the manuscripts during the years studied (OR, 1.5).

CONCLUSION

The number of authors per articles and collaborative studies increased over time in implant-related journals. Collaborative studies were more likely to be funded.

How many orthopedic surgeons does it take to write a research article? 50 years of authorship proliferation in and internationalization of the orthopedic surgery literature

Publications are considered to indicate academic achievement and can lead to various rewards, including job opportunities and research funding. Recent years have seen a rising trend in the number of articles published, multiple authorship, and internationalization of the biomedical literature. The goal of this study was to analyze the trends in authorship over the past 50 years to determine whether the orthopedic literature parallels trends seen in other areas of the biomedical literature. We performed an observational study with analysis of the number of authors and geographic origin of articles published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume (JBJS) and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (CORR). We analyzed 2776 articles (CORR, n=1809; JBJS, n=967) published between 1958 and 2008 at 10-year intervals. There has been a significant increase in the mean number of authors per article from 1.638 to 4.08 (P<.0001) and 1.633 to 4.540 (P<.0001) for CORR and JBJS, respectively between 1958 and 2008. There has been a significant increase in the international contribution to both journals (P<.0001). The number of countries contributing to articles increased from 5 to 39 and from 17 to 33 for CORR and JBJS, respectively. These findings are similar to other areas of the biomedical literature. The reasons for this proliferation are multifactorial, including multicenter trials and inappropriate authorship. Guidelines for authorship and preparation of manuscripts from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors or from individual journals are widely available, and every effort should be made to adhere to them to prevent inappropriate authorship proliferation in the future.