Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years

Abstract

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 1st 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 1st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.

Bibliometrische Analyse von Forschungsgebieten, Publikationshierarchie und Autorengeschlecht der deutschen universitären Unfallchirurgie und Orthopädie

“…This is less than in the present study with a proportion of women of 4.3 % among last authors and 8.0 % among first authors (▶ Table 6). In another bibliometric study, which reviewed 12819 manuscripts in the musculoskeletal literature, 79.5 % had men as first authors, with women being more likely to be first authors in basic science papers (33.2 %) than in clinical papers (12.7 %) [17]. The latter could not be confirmed in the present study.…”

Gender and Geographic Origin as Determinants of Manuscript Publication Outcomes: JBMR® Bibliometric Analysis from 2017 to 2019

“…( 7,8 ) Although percentages differ by region and specific geographic origin, these increases in the representation of women are in line with the greater number of women completing medical or graduate school and achieving faculty positions over the last 30 years. ( 9‐12 ) This shift in gender representation is also observed within peer review over the past 30 years, with increasing diversity in the composition of top editorial teams and editorial boards of orthopedic and musculoskeletal journals including JBMR® . ( 10 ) The editors of JBMR® rely on an Editorial Board (EB) of over 80 members who are committed to reviewing several manuscripts per year.…”

“…( 9‐12 ) This shift in gender representation is also observed within peer review over the past 30 years, with increasing diversity in the composition of top editorial teams and editorial boards of orthopedic and musculoskeletal journals including JBMR® . ( 10 ) The editors of JBMR® rely on an Editorial Board (EB) of over 80 members who are committed to reviewing several manuscripts per year. In addition, the reviewer pool utilized by the editors includes more than 1000 experts registered in the journal database and can be expanded by using publicly available reference search databases (eg, PubMed) to identify nonregistered experts as potential reviewers.…”

La mujer ortopedista

“…El incremento de mujeres como primer autor entre 2006 y 2017 fue de 11 a 17%, significativo pero claramente insuficiente. 43 Un completísimo estudio bibliométrico de la literatura ortopédica en inglés de los últimos 30 años muestra cómo la mujer firmaba como primer autor en un 11% y aparecía como autor corresponsal en 9% de artículos publicados en 1985-1987, tanto en un caso como en otro, esos artículos tenían más autores, más instituciones, países, referencias y páginas, en trabajos de un solo autor la mujer lo era en la mitad de los casos que el hombre, algo se ha enmendado con el paso del tiempo y así en 2015-2016 la figura de la mujer como primer autor ascendió a 24%, igual que su presencia como editores y en los consejos editoriales de las publicaciones de la especialidad, 44 en las tres revistas ortopédicas citadas arriba había en 2007 un 3% de mujeres en sus consejos editoriales y en 2017 un 9%. 45 En los congresos o convenciones anuales de la AAOS, entre 2015 y 2019, las mujeres representaron 5.9% de los moderadores e instructores de cursos, el porcentaje de mujeres moderadoras de sesiones ascendió de 6% en 2015 a 8.6% en 2019, en tanto que el número de instructoras creció de 3.4% en 2015 a 5.6% en 2019, ajustando las cifras a la posible presencia dual múltiple de un mismo individuo en uno u otro papel a lo largo del programa científico de las reuniones, 6.7% de moderadores e instructores fueron mujeres, 6.3% en 2015 y 7.7% en 2019.…”