Publication Trends and Global Collaborations on Esophageal Atresia Research: A Bibliometric Study

Abstract

Introduction Research on esophageal atresia (EA) has been heavily published over the past decades. Herein, we aimed to study the quantity and quality as well as key topics in EA research with regards to global collaborations among countries and authors. Material and Methods Publications on EA from 1945 to 2018 were extracted from the Web of Science core collection database. Productivity (quantity) was assessed by the number of publications. Quality was estimated from the number of citations, citation rate per item and year, h-index, and impact index. Collaborative networks were evaluated using VOSviewer. All measures were analyzed for countries, authors, and journals. The 10 most cited original articles between 1969 and 2018 in 5-year intervals (n = 100) were manually screened to assess the key points of EA research. Results A total of 2,170 publications from 85 countries published in 388 journals were identified yielding 26,755 citations, both significantly increasing over time (p < 0.001). The most productive countries and authors also accounted for high-quality publications and benefited from an active global network. The most productive journals derived from the field of pediatric surgery but accounted only for one-third of EA papers. The best cited journals were unspecific for pediatric surgery. Long-term outcome remained the most important topic in EA research, followed by surgical techniques, epidemiology, associated anomalies, perioperative complications, and postnatal management. In contrast, basic science was underrepresented. Conclusion Over the past seven decades, EA publications increased tremendously. Productiveness and quality benefited from global networking. Long-term outcome remains the key interest of EA research.

The Top Ranked 101 Articles in Pediatric Surgical Journals from an Altmetric Perspective

“…We also did not observe any correlation between AAS and the impact index, a more robust marker for the recognition by scientific peers, as it accounts for the number of citations over time period since publication 7,12 . The relationship between altmetrics and peers' appraisal as one aspect of scientific quality, is much lower than the relationship between peers' assessments and number of citations 44 .…”

“…42,43 We also did not observe any correlation between AAS and the impact index, a more robust marker for the recognition by scientific peers, as it accounts for the number of citations over time period since publication. 7,12 The relationship between altmetrics and peers' appraisal as one aspect of scientific quality is much lower than the relationship between peers' assessments and number of citations. 44 Thus, the absolute number of citations and the impact index, respectively, might address the interest of the scientific community on a scientific publication, while AAS reflects the public interest and online media focus on it.…”

“…In contrast to traditional bibliometric studies that provide insights into a global research productivity by using mathematical and statistical methods, none of the established measurements such as the date and journal of publication, number of citations, impact factor, impact index, or h-index are taken into account for the calculation of AAS. [7][8][9] The correlation between AAS ratings and traditional bibliometric analyses remains controversial and has not been evaluated for manuscripts with the highest AAS scores in pediatric surgery. 10 Therefore, this study aimed to identify and characterize the top 100 articles with the highest AAS in pediatric surgery.…”

Variability in the Reporting of Baseline Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcomes in Esophageal Atresia Publications: A Systematic Review

“…By contrast, a recent overview of publication trends and global collaborations on EA research found particular interest in the longterm outcome, surgical techniques, and epidemiology when assessing key points of the 10 most cited EA publications since 1945. 7 Thus, there is a mismatch between the shortterm focus of the large majority of EA research versus the long-term outcomes that professionals and advocacy groups deem most important. Obviously, the reporting of shortterm outcomes is easier than the reporting of long-term outcomes, for sequelae such as motor/neurodevelopment, chest wall deformities, chronic respiratory diseases, and lung function impairment often occur later in childhood or adolescence and thus require longer follow-up.…”

Predicting the number of citations of polycystic kidney disease with 100 top-cited articles since 2010: Bibliometric analysis

“…Bibliometry is a technique that analyzes articles with quantity and quality in a disciple (or on a specific topic) through a series of statistical methods. [9] In addition, bibliometrics can also present the relationship between authors, research institutions, and affiliated countries of orientation. [10] The citation analysis regarding the number of articles predicted by factors (e.g., MeSH terms) was addressed in the literature.…”