Level III, retrospective comparative series.

Background:The number of article citations has been used as a measure for the impact of an article in the medical literature, with little emphasis on quality.Purpose:To (1) identify the top 50 most cited articles related to rotator cuff repair surgery, (2) determine whether there was a correlation between the top cited articles and level of evidence, and (3) determine whether there was a correlation between the top cited articles and study quality.Study Design:Cross-sectional study.Methods:The Web of Science and Scopus online databases were searched to identify the top 50 cited articles in rotator cuff repair surgery. Methodological quality was analyzed for each article using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS), Jadad scale, and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the degree of correlation between the top cited articles and level of evidence and study quality using each quality score.Results:The mean number of citations for each article in each of the 2 databases was 319 ± 187 (range, 177.5-1033.5). Twenty-nine articles (58%) were from the United States. The most common level of evidence was level 4 (54%), with 3 (6%) articles being level 1. There was no significant correlation between the mean number of citations and level of evidence (r s = –0.28), the MCMS (r s = –0.29), and the MINORS score (r s = –0.25). There was a weak negative correlation between the mean number of citations and the Jadad score (r s = –0.36).Conclusion:The top 50 cited articles in rotator cuff repair surgery comprise a variety of years, journals, countries of origin, and study types. Despite being the 50 most cited articles, the most common type of article was the level 4 case series with a poor mean quality assessment score. There was no significant correlation between the mean number of citations and level of evidence or methodological quality using a variety of scores.

Background:Several studies have analyzed the most cited articles in shoulder, elbow, pediatrics, and foot and ankle surgery. However, no study has analyzed the quality of the most cited articles in elbow medial ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) surgery.Purpose:To (1) identify the top 50 most cited articles related to UCL surgery, (2) determine whether there was a correlation between the top cited articles and level of evidence, and (3) determine whether there was a correlation between study methodological quality and the top cited articles.Study Design:Systematic review.Methods:Web of Science and Scopus online databases were searched to identify the top 50 cited articles in UCL surgery. Level of evidence, number of times cited, year of publication, name of journal, country of origin, and study type were recorded for each study. Study methodological quality was analyzed for each article with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS) and the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS). Correlation coefficients were calculated.Results:The 50 most cited articles were published between 1981 and 2015. The number of citations per article ranged from 20 to 301 (mean ± SD, 71 ± 62 citations). Most articles (92%) were from the United States and were level 3 (16%), level 4 (58%), or unclassified (16%) evidence. There were no articles of level 1 evidence quality. The mean MCMS and MINORS scores were 28.1 ± 13.4 (range, 3-52) and 9.2 ± 3.6 (range, 2-19), respectively. There was no significant correlation between the mean number of citations and level of evidence or quality (rs = –0.01, P = .917), MCMS (rs = 0.09, P = .571), or MINORS (rs = –0.26, P = .089).Conclusion:The top 50 cited articles in UCL surgery constitute a low level of evidence and low methodological quality, including no level 1 articles. There was no significant correlation between the mean number of citations and level of evidence or study methodological quality. However, weak correlations were observed for later publication date and improved level of evidence and methodological quality.