Orthopaedic Academic Activity in the United States: Bibliometric Analysis of Publications by City and State

Abstract

Background:The purpose of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis of orthopaedic academic output in the United States.Methods:Publications based on city and state origin, corrected for population size, median household income, total number of surgeons, and the number of various subspecialties were evaluated. The 15 highest-ranked orthopaedic journals were audited from 2010 to 2014 and then subdivided into anatomic regions and 14 subspecialties.Results:A total of 8,100 articles were published during the study period. Most originated from New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Minnesota. New York published the greatest number by city, followed by Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, and Rochester. When adjusted for the number of publications per city, surgeons per population, publications per surgeon population, publications per population, and publications per median income per capita, Vail and New York led in two and Stanford in one of the metrics.Conclusions:New York was the leader for the total publications, greatest activity within subspecialties, and publications per surgeon/population and per median income/capita. Vail was the leader for publications/surgeon and population. The top four cities of New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago were responsible for 28% of the academic output over the 5-year study period.

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

“…They explained this with a higher emphasis being placed on research productivity among faculty in the West. Hohmann et al [ 12 ] conducted a bibliometric analysis of orthopaedic academic output in the USA. The 15 highest-ranking orthopaedic journals were audited from 2010 to 2014 and then subdivided into anatomic regions and 14 subspecialties.…”

actividad científica en un centro de alta complejidad

“…Prueba de eso fue la acreditación de nuestro Hospital a los estándares de la Joint Comission International. Sin embargo la valoración de la productividad científica (investigación), es difícil de cuantificar y medir, y este problema no solo se presenta en nuestro medio, si no que es una problemática mundial [5] . Diferentes estrategias han sido puestas en práctica, con el fin de poder obtener un valor objetivo y comparable sobre las publicaciones, tales como número total o el factor h [3,6] .…”

“…802 (56%) foram realizados apenas por nossa instituição e 619 (44%) corresponderam a estudos multicêntricos. Medicina interna (341 -23,99%) foi a unidade com mais publicações e Informática Médica a unidade com a melhor relação entre% de publicações e% profissionais (5,39). 82% (1167) dos artigos estavam em inglês e o valor da medina do fator de impacto foi de 2,61 (rango: 0,01-29,78).…”

Outcomes of Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Acetabular Protrusio

“…The Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was used to identify the study cohort of interest over a 5-year period (2010 to 2014). 20 The NRD is a database that compiles inpatient data from 22 states and tracks patients across multiple hospitals. This database is validated by a federal-state-industry partnership sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.…”

“…Approximately 51.2% of the total US population and 49.3% of all US hospitalizations were sampled in a stratified algorithm, allowing for an accurate estimation of nationally representative statistics. 20 Available variables include patient demographic data, diagnoses, procedures, hospital charges, hospital LOS, and hospital characteristics. The deidentification of the NRD deemed this study exempt from our institution's Institutional Review Board.…”