Abstract
Background
The Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma (JCOT) is one of the top three orthopaedic journals from India. We set out to analyse the top 50 cited articles from JCOT since indexing in PubMed and Scopus.
Methods
We looked into the bibliometrics of the top 50 cited articles and compared citations from PubMed and Scopus, and depicted outputs from VOS viewer analysis on co-authorship and keywords.
Results
Total citations for top-cited articles were 1076 in numbers, with a maximum of 103.2016 and 2018 were the most productive years. The major contribution was from India with 74%, followed by the USA. New Delhi published maximally at 72%. Clinical topics and narrative reviews were the most common types of studies. Trauma and Adult reconstruction was the most common sub-specialities, and Level 4 was the most frequent level of study. The basic science and COVID-19 related articles received the maximum citations. The authors from Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals published the maximum number of top-50 cited articles in the JCOT.
Conclusions
There is a steady increase in the number of publications in the JCOT, with an increasing number of citation counts. Both the Indian and foreign authors have been publishing in this journal at a comparative rate. Although the citation counts in Scopus are more than those in PubMed for given articles, more than 80% of articles are listed in both databases as top 50 cited articles. The majority of top-cited articles belonged to trauma and adult reconstruction, level III studies, and narrative reviews.
Keywords: Bibliometrics, JCOT, Indian journal, 50 most cited, Orthopaedic bibliometrics
1. Introduction
The Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma (JCOT) is an official journal of the Delhi Orthopaedic Association (DOA) and was started in 2010.1 There has been significant growth of this journal since its inception.2 Initially, it was published as biennial issues and has now gone up to as a monthly publication since 2021. It is now published on Article Based Publication (ABP) model, where the accepted article is published immediately and is assigned an article number and an issue. This model helps increase the visibility and readership of the published articles and receiving more citation.3 A scientometric analysis of the publications of JCOT in the past five years from 2020 was published in the last year.2 Very few journals have published similar analyses and audits of their publications.4, 5, 6 There are more than 1500 JCOT documents already published on PubMed and Scopus each. The bibliometric analysis of the top 50 cited articles of this journal would help identify trends of publications and citations and hence focus on the strengths and identify areas that potentially need improvements in future issues.
The objective of the study was to evaluate the type of articles published in JCOT that gain the maximum citation. The primary bibliometric evaluation was based on the top 50 publications of JCOT in PubMed. The secondary objective was to compare the discrepancy between the top 50 publications of JCOT that were cited in PubMed and Scopus.
2. Methods
A search was done in PubMed on 15/3/2021 using the search strategy: ((“JCOT"[Journal]) OR (“"J ClinOrthop Trauma""[Journal]) OR (“j clinorthop trauma"[Journal])). JCOT publications found since 2012 (listed in PubMed) were 1180 with a total citations count of 2932. A similar search was done in Scopus with a search strategy SCRTITLE (journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma) in May 2021.
The top 50 most cited articles were selected from this list from PubMed as well as Scopus, and these were analysed in the following report for authors, affiliations, partnering institutions, nature, and type of studies, sub-speciality, level of evidence of the studies published along with their citation counts and publication numbers. PubMed and Scopus publication numbers and citation counts were compared.
Maps were created in VOS viewer software, Leiden University version 1.6.16. Full counting was used, and the minimum number of keywords and authors was selected as 1 in each case (the maximum no of authors was 25 by default). IBM SPSS software version 20 was used for data analysis.
3. Results
3.1. PubMed and scopus
The total number of citations of the top 50 articles was 1076, with overall average citations per year of 5.62. The average citations per year were maximum for 2019 at 2020, followed by 2020 at 15.60. There has been a progressive increase in the number of average citations per year. There has been at least one publication in the top 50 cited articles every year, starting from 2012. The year 2016 had the maximum number of citations of 215, followed by 2018 with 207. The maximum number of the top-cited articles were published in 2016 and 2018, with 12 articles each (48% of articles). There were 1484 citations in total for the 50 papers in Scopus.
The article with the most citations was by Pandey et al. at 1037 with average citations per year of 12.86, followed by Vaishya et al.8 at 87 citations and 10.88 citations per year. These review articles dealt with bone drilling and bone cement.
3.2. Number of authors (PubMed)
The average number of authors in the top 50 publications was 3.8, and the number of authors ranged from 1 to 11. Majority of the top 50 articles (n = 15 [30%]) had 2 authors followed by 3 authors (n = 9 [18%]) and 4 authors (n = 8 [16%]). A minority of the publications had 9, 10 and 11 authors (n = 1 [2%] each). The top five first authors with the sum of their citations in the top 50 articles were - Vaishya et al. (141), Pandey et al. (103), Lal et al. (45), Thakore et al. (44), and Agarwal et al. (34).
3.3. Affiliations (PubMed)
The number of affiliations for the top 50 publications ranged from 1 to 10, and the average number of affiliations was 2.3. Authors of majority of the publications had 2 affiliations (n = 18 [36%]) followed by single affiliation (n = 17 [34%]). Minority of the top 50 publications had 6 and 10 affiliations (n = 1 [2%] each).The top 5 institutes from India were Indraprastha Apollo hospital Delhi [seven out of top 50 cited articles, total number of citations in PubMed = 180] followed by AIIMS, Delhi [ six out of the top 50 cited articles, The total number of citations in PubMed = 120], IIT Patna [one out of top 50 cited articles, the total number of citations in PubMed = 102], Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung hospital [three out of top 50 cited articles, the total number of citations in PubMed = 74] and Maulana Azad Medical College, Delhi [3 out of top 50 cited articles, the total number of citations in PubMed = 69].
3.4. Year of publication (PubMed)
Fig. 1 depicts the number of publications in various years. 2016 and 2018 were the most productive years (n = 12 [24%] each) followed by 2015 (n = 7 [14%]). 2015 and 2020 were the third most productive years (n = 5 [10%] each).
Fig. 1.
Number of publications Vs year. Numbers at the top of the bar represents the total number of publications from the 50 most cited articles in JCOT. Numbers at the base of the bars are sum of citations.
3.5. Bibliometric indices (PubMed)
The total number of citations ranged from 12 to 103, and the mean number of citations was 21.52 ± 16.92. The number of citations per year ranged from 1.3 to 19 and the mean number of citations per year was 5.62 ± 4.35. The expected citations per year ranged from 1 to 2.2 and the mean expected citation per year was 1.52 ± 0.32. The field citation rate ranged from 1.12 to 4.23, and the mean-field citation rate was 2.56 ± 0.73. The top 5 most cited articles were: Pandey et al.,7 Vaishya et al.,8 Lal et al.,9 Thakore et al.10, and Agarwal et al.11
3.6. Country of publication (PubMed)
Fig. 2 summarizes contribution to the 50 most cited articles by various countries. India was the most productive country (n = 27 [54%]) followed by the United States of America (n = 10 [20%]), United Kingdom (n = 4 [8%]) and Japan (n = 3 [6%]). The total number of citations for the top 50 articles from India was 676, and the mean number of citations was 25.04 ± 5.59 (range of the number of citations: 12 to 103). The total number of citations from the USA was 183, and the mean number of citations was 18.3 ± 9.42 (range of the number of citations: 12 to 44). The total number of citations from the UK was 61, and the mean number of citations was 15.3 ± 0.96 (range of the number of citations: 14 to 16). The total number of citations from Japan was 47, and the mean number of citations was 15.7 ± 1.53 (range of the number of citations: 14 to 17).
Fig. 2.
Number of top 50 cited publications with their citation counts in the JCOT by country of origin. Numbers at the top of the bar represents the total number of publications from the 50 most cited articles in JCOT. Numbers at the base of the bars are sum of citations.
3.7. Indian States
Fig. 3 summarizes contribution to the 50 most cited articles by various cities, states and union territories of India. Twenty (74%) out of the 27 publications from India were from Delhi. The other publications were from the Indian states of Bihar, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Chandigarh in the descending order of citation counts. The average citation was maximum for Bihar, with 103 from one publication, followed by Rajasthan at 27 from a single publication. New Delhi has been the most academically prolific city with the most citations Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Indian State-wise distribution of the top 50 publications with their citation counts. Numbers at the top of the bar represents the total number of publications from the 50 most cited articles in JCOT. Numbers at the base of the bars are sum of citations.
3.8. Number of partnering institutes
The majority of the top 50 studies (n = 36 [72%]) were published from a single institute. There was a collaboration between two institutes in 8 publications (16%), three institutes in 2 publications (4%), and four institutes in 3 publications (6%). The highest collaboration was observed in a study that had seven partnering institutions.
3.9. Nature of study
The majority of the publications were on clinical topics (n = 45 [90%]) followed by basic science topics (n = 3 [6%]) and biomechanical topics (n = 2 [4%]). The total number of citations for clinical, biomechanical, and basic science topics were 824, 190, and 62, respectively. But publications on biomechanics had the highest mean citation (95 ± 11.31; range: 12 to 45) followed by basic sciences (20.7 ± 9.87; range: 14 to 32) and clinical topics (18.3 ± 7.45; range: 12 to 45).
3.10. Type of study
Fig. 4 shows the publication numbers of various types of articles. Majority of the publications were narrative reviews Fig. 4(n = 30 [60%]) followed by randomized controlled trials (n = 4 [8%]) and retrospective cohort studies (n = 4 [8%]). Narrative reviews had the highest number of total citations (n = 725) followed by retrospective cohort study (n = 88), randomized controlled trial (n = 81), case series (n = 46) and prospective observational study or cross sectional study (n = 43). Narrative review had the highest mean number of citations (24.2 ± 20.77; range: 12 to 103) followed by retrospective cohort study (22 ± 14.77; range: 13 to 44), randomized controlled trial (20.3 ± 5.74; range: 15 to 27), case series (15.3 ± 3.1; range: 12 to 18) and prospective observational study or cross sectional study (14.3 ± 2.31; range: 13 to 17).
Fig. 4.
Publication numbers by type of article with their citation counts. Numbers away from the bar represents the total number of publications from the 50 most cited articles in JCOT. Numbers closer to the bars are sum of citations (total citation count).
3.11. Sub-speciality
Trauma and adult reconstruction were the most commonly cited specialities, followed by advances in orthopaedics, particularly 3D printing (Fig. 5). The highest number of citations were from trauma (n = 162), followed by adult reconstruction (n = 152) and advances in orthopaedics with an emphasis on 3D printing (n = 136).
Fig. 5.
Top 50 cited articles by sub-speciality with their citation counts. Numbers away from the bar represents the total number of publications from the 50 most cited articles in JCOT. Numbers closer to the bars are sum of citations (total citation count).
3.12. Level of evidence
The majority (n = 34, 68%) of the top 50 articles were level IV evidence with a citation count at 784, followed by level III evidence (n = 7, 14%) with a citation count at 135 (Fig. 6). There were three articles with Level I, II, and V evidence. The highest average citation per article was 23.06 for level 4 articles, followed by level 3 articles at 19.29.
Fig. 6.
Top 50 publications by Level of Evidence and their total citations. Numbers at the top of the bar represents the total number of publications from the 50 most cited articles in JCOT. Numbers at the base of the bars are sum of citations.
3.13. References
The mean number of references in the top 50 cited articles was 34 ± 23.5 (range: 2 to 124).
3.14. The discrepancy between the top 50 articles determined by PubMed and Scopus
In the list of top 50 publications, 43 publications were common in both PubMed and the Scopus list (Supplementary file 1). There were seven publications that were dissimilar in both lists.
The rank order of 1st, 2nd, 17th, and 22nd were in complete agreement between PubMed and Scopus searches (Bold Italics). The highest and lowest numbers in each column are highlighted in green and red, respectively (Supplementary file 2). Seven articles were exclusively identified in the top 50 only on PubMed or Scopus (Bold and underlined).
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for single measures were evaluated for an absolute agreement based on the two-way mixed-effects model. ICC for total citations of 43 common publications in PubMed and Scopus was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.55 to 0.89, p < 0.0001). The ICC for citations per year of 43 common publications in PubMed and Scopus was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.55 to 0.93, p < 0.0001).
The VOS viewer output for the keywords revealed prominent words like treatment outcome, computer-assisted tomography, 3D printing, total knee arthroplasty, additive manufacturing. The bubbles in yellow are more recent topics, and those nearing violet are older terms nearing 2012 (Fig. 7). The authorship map of the top 50 most cited JCOT articles on Scopus showed that the top-cited JCOT authors were working mostly in isolated groups (Fig. 8).
Fig. 7.
VOS Viewer Output for Keywords of top 50 articles.
Fig. 8.
Authorship map for the top 50 cited articles.
4. Discussion
The authorship by region and country of authors showed a similar trend in the top 50 articles compared to a previous scientometric analysis.2 This analysis has shown that the most common level of evidence of top-cited studies was of level IV and V. But, among the top-cited publications, the top level of evidence was IV (68%) and III (14%), indicating to publications with a higher level of evidence are likely to increase the citations count of the journal.
There has been a steady increase in the most cited publication numbers from 2012 to 2016 (Fig. 1). Thirty articles belonged to this time period. While, from 2017 to 2020, only 20 articles were in the top 50. It could have happened because it usually takes time for articles to get peak citations. Normally it takes five to seven years for an article to peak its citations, and hence the publications from more recent years would take time to peak in their citation numbers. The average citations per document as given on Scimago website is 1.2 for JCOT. But for the top 50 cited articles, the average is 5.62 that is more than four times the average document. The top-cited article7 with 12.86 is more than ten times the average citations of an average document in JCOT. There have been five articles in the top 50 that were published in the year 2020, and all of them were related to COVID-19.12, 13, 14, 15, 16 All these articles from the year 2020 were cited 78 times making up 7.25% of total citations. Excepting one, all these articles have the highest citations per year among all the top 50 articles. The articles with the most citations per year in PubMed (19 citations/year) and Scopus (24 citations/year) were published in 2020.12 It remains to be seen whether the same rate continues in subsequent years for all COVID-19 articles even after COVID-19 abates.
The analysis indicates that the majority of the top 50 articles (86%) analysed from PubMed and Scopus were common for both search engines (supplementary file 1). The numbers of citations were higher in Scopus compared to PubMed. It may be because of more orthopaedic journals indexed with Scopus than with PubMed. Hence citations for a particular article could be more from these increased numbers when compared with PubMed indexed journals. Another possible reason is that JCOT was indexed with Scopus since 2010, whereas indexing with PubMed started in 2012.
JCOT is one of the top orthopaedic journals in India, and hence one would expect it to publish more articles from Indian authors to cater to Indian readers (Fig. 2). The top 50 articles were published from 10 countries; the majority (54%) of these articles were from India and the remaining 46% from abroad, indicating the International presence and recognition of this journal. The USA (20%) was the second most contributing country. Narrative reviews represented the bulk of the top-cited articles (60%), followed by Randomized Controlled Trials (8%) and retrospective Cohort Studies (8%). The level of evidence has not been set for narrative reviews.17 We considered them to be level IV for the purpose of this study.
Trauma and adult reconstruction was the most popular specialities with 18% of each of the articles followed by advanced technologies (3D printing etc.) at 14%. It is interesting that COVID-related articles make up 10% of these top-cited articles. Given the fact that it has been only a year since the outbreak of the pandemic, such high numbers of citations are remarkable, and the reasons for the high citation numbers have been proposed in a previous publication.18,19
The VOS viewer output from keywords for the top 50 cited articles (Fig. 7) revealed prominent words like treatment outcome, computer-assisted tomography, 3D printing, total knee arthroplasty, additive manufacturing.
4.1. Recommendations
Higher-level evidence publications could attract more citations to the journal that should include Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Reviews/Meta-analysis. Currently, New Delhi appears to be the city publishing major number of high-quality articles. High-quality research activities from other cities may be encouraged to increase participation from other centers. Collaborative studies would also improve in the quality of studies, as well as increase citations. More basic science, technology, and biomechanics-related publications would help the journal by increasing its citations.
4.2. Limitations and strengths of the study
We acknowledge that it is a retrospective analysis of a single journal, and there is a lack of a comparative group in the study. However, this bibliometric analysis brings out the trend of publications in one of top most Indian Orthopaedic journals and thus able to make recommendations for its future growth and can help guide the other Orthopaedic journals from India and abroad to take cognizance of these publication trend and follow these recommendations, for their journal's growth.
5. Conclusions
There has been a steady increase in the publications over the last decade, with an increasing number of citation counts. Both the Indian and foreign authors have been publishing in this journal at a comparative rate. Although the citation counts in Scopus were more than those in PubMed for given articles, more than 80% of articles listed in both databases as top 50 cited articles. The majority of articles belong to trauma and adult reconstruction, level III studies, and narrative reviews. The New Delhi and Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals authors published the maximum of top-50 cited articles in the JCOT. COVID-19 related articles received the maximum number of citations in a short period.
Financial disclosure
None.
Declaration of competing interest
All the authors are on the Editorial Board of the JCOT.
Acknowledgment
None.
Footnotes
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101590.
Contributor Information
Karthik Vishwanathan, Email: karthik_vishwanathan@yahoo.com, karthik.vishwanathan@paruluniversity.ac.in.
Srinivas B.S. Kambhampati, Email: kbssrinivas@gmail.com.
Mohit Kumar Patralekh, Email: mohitkumarpatralekh@gmail.com.
Abhishek Vaish, Email: drabhishekvaish@gmail.com.
Raju Vaishya, Email: raju.vaishya@gmail.com.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
The following are the Supplementary data to this article:
References
- 1.Vaishya R., Maini L., Lal H. A journey of the journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018;9(4):277–280. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2018.09.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Vaishya R., Patralekh M.K., Vaish A. Last five years audit of Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma (JCOT) - a scientometric analysis. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(2):176–183. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.01.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Vaishya R. Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma - a shining star from India. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2021;12(1):4–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.12.024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Mavrogenis A.F., Megaloikonomos P.D., Panagopoulos G.N., Mauffrey C., Quaile A., Scarlat M.M. Best one hundred papers of International Orthopaedics: a bibliometric analysis. Int Orthop. 2017;41(4):689–697. doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3376-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Yuan F., Cai J., Liu B., Tang X. Bibliometric analysis of 100 top-cited articles in gastric disease. BioMed Res Int. 2020:1–8. doi: 10.1155/2020/2672373. 2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Coronado R.A., Wurtzel W.A., Simon C.B., Riddle D.L., George S.Z. Content and bibliometric analysis of articles published in the journal of orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41(12):920–931. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2011.3808. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Pandey R.K., Panda S.S. Drilling of bone: a comprehensive review. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2013;4(1):15–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2013.01.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Vaishya R., Chauhan M., Vaish A. Bone cement. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2013;4(4):157–163. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2013.11.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Lal H., Patralekh M.K. 3D printing and its applications in orthopaedic trauma: a technological marvel. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018;9(3):260–268. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2018.07.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Thakore R.V., Greenberg S.E., Shi H. Surgical site infection in orthopedic trauma: a case-control study evaluating risk factors and cost. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2015;6(4):220–226. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2015.04.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Agarwal A., Shaharyar A., Kumar A., Bhat M.S., Mishra M. Scurvy in pediatric age group - a disease often forgotten? J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2015;6(2):101–107. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2014.12.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Kambhampati S.B.S., Vaishya R., Vaish A. Unprecedented surge in publications related to COVID-19 in the first three months of pandemic: a bibliometric analytic report. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(Suppl 3):S304–S306. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Haleem A., Javaid M., Vaishya R., Vaish A. Effects of COVID-19 pandemic in the field of orthopaedics. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(3):498–499. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.03.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Ashford R.U., Nichols J.S., Mangwani J. Annotation: the COVID-19 pandemic and clinical orthopaedic and trauma surgery. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(3):504–505. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Iyengar K.P., Jain V.K., Vaish A., Vaishya R., Maini L., Lal H. Post COVID-19: planning strategies to resume orthopaedic surgery -challenges and considerations. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(Suppl 3):S291–S295. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Viswanath A., Monga P. Working through the COVID-19 outbreak: rapid review and recommendations for MSK and allied heath personnel. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(3):500–503. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.03.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Wright J.G., Swiontkowski M.F., Heckman J.D. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85(1):1–3. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Kambhampati S.B.S., Vasudeva N., Vaishya R., Patralekh M.K. Top 50 cited articles on Covid-19 after the first year of the pandemic: a bibliometric analysis. Diabetes Metab Syndr Clin Res Rev. 2021;15(4) doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2021.05.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Vishwanathan K., Kambhampati S., Vaishya R. Top 100 cited articles on diabetes mellitus and Covid-19: a bibliometric analysis. Diabetes Metab Syndr Clin Res Rev. 2021;15(4) doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2021.05.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.