Trends in publication of general surgical research in New Zealand, 1996–2015

Wells, Cameron I.; Robertson, Jason; O’Grady, Gregory; Bissett, Ian P.

doi:10.1111/ans.13821

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wells et al demonstrated a trend towards publication of higher-level evidence with an increase in median IF equivalent to the expected organic growth of journal IF. 4 New Zealand ranks 14th globally with respect to general surgical publications per 10 6 inhabitants from 2000 to 2005, whereas Australia, comparably, ranks 11th globally. 3 The development of guidelines including the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 7 and Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 8 Statements is reflective of the need for standardized approaches to rigorous reporting of medical research.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Other studies that have investigated trends in publication of general surgical research demonstrated an improvement in data quality over time associated with an increased proportion of RCTs (26% versus 48%, p < 0.05) 9 . Factors that have contributed towards the trend in increasing research growth in the surgical field have previously been discussed 4,9,10 . There is a strong encouragement for participation for accreditation within departmental surgical units 11 and publications are highly encouraged from prevocational surgical trainees in order to meet prerequisites of applying for surgical training, which is similar across many medical specialties.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia, 2000–2020

Izwan

Chan

Ibraheem

et al. 2022

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The significance of evidence-based surgery has resulted in a shift towards producing high-quality surgical research. The aim of this bibliometric analysis was to evaluate trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia from 2000 to 2020. Methods: General surgery publications including clinical trials, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews and meta-analyses by Australian-affiliated authors between 2000 and 2020 were extracted from PubMed. Titles, abstracts, journals and authors were independently screened by two investigators and arbitrated by a third. Publication type and area of focus were manually entered. Quality of articles was measured by trends in impact factor (IF) and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data and identify trends. Results: Three hundered and ninety-eight articles met inclusion criteria for this study, with a progressive increase in publications over the study period. RCTs and systematic reviews accounted for 109 and 234 publications, respectively. The median number of authors remained constant (p = 0.060). There was a significant increase in publication of clinical trials and RCTs (p < 0.001) as well as systematic reviews and meta-analyses (p < 0.001). The median IF increased from 1.93 to 3.08, whilst median SJR increased from 1.11 to 1.16, equivalent to organic growth of journal IF and SJR over this period. Female authorship significantly increased over time (p < 0.001). Conclusion: There is a trend towards increased quantity, quality and diversity in Australian general surgery publications, which is indicative of the progression and importance of robust modern surgical research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia, 2000–2020

Izwan

Chan

Ibraheem

et al. 2022

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The last 10 years has seen the development of many academic focused courses and themes within Australian based surgical training (19). Nowadays, there exists many a provision of surgical research grants from both RACS and subspecialty societies, most notably the Garnett Passe in ENT, providing the necessary financial support for trainees and fellows wishing to conduct either part or full-time research (20).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in the quality & quantity of otorhinolaryngology research in Australia: 1989–2018

Bell-Allen¹,

Cervin²,

Vasani³

2019

Aust J Otolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Trends in the quality and quantity of surgical research in Australia have recently experienced considerable growth, stemming from the adoption of the "evidence-based practise" framework. The aim of this 30-year retrospective epidemiological study is to identify and analyse trends in publication of clinical otorhinolaryngology research in Australia from 1989 to 2018. Methods: The 24 highest ranked otorhinolaryngology journals worldwide were identified based on their respective impact factor (IF). Using OVID MEDLINE/PubMed, each Journal was searched for publications with an Australian affiliation for the last 30 years. One investigator screened and analysed results, collecting relevant data for all articles meeting inclusion criteria. Results: A total of 1,095 articles were identified from the period between 1989-2018. There has been an exponential increase in the total number of publications throughout this time. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) accounted for 36 publications, whilst systematic reviews were tallied at 53 publications; with a trend towards publication of higher (level 1 & 2) levels of evidence. Level 4 evidence (prospective or retrospective case series), accounted for the largest quota of study designs, at 535 articles (48.9%). Furthermore, there has been a statistically significant increase in both multi-institutional and multinational collaborative research. Conclusions: There has been a considerable increase in the quantity and quality of otorhinolaryngology research within Australia in the last three decades. This is largely due to a strong impetus from the Royal Australasian College of Surgeon (RACS) on a developing academic surgical culture in concordance with financial support from bequeathing otorhinolaryngology foundations and a trend towards more multiinstitutional and multinational collaboration.

show abstract

“…In the field of surgical research, the translational impact of surgical trials on clinical practice is rarely evaluated, hampering optimal implementation and de-implementation of surgical interventions [9]. It was suggested that reducing low-value surgical interventions, based on high-quality evidence, can save €153 million per year in the United Kingdom alone [10][11][12][13][14]. High-quality surgical research has increased worldwide in the past decades [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of surgical intervention trials on healthcare: A systematic review of assessment methods, healthcare outcomes, and determinants

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Frameworks used in research impact evaluation studies vary widely and it remains unclear which methods are most appropriate for evaluating research impact in the field of surgical research. Therefore, we aimed to identify and review the methods used to assess the impact of surgical intervention trials on healthcare and to identify determinants for surgical impact. Methods We searched journal databases up to March 10, 2020 for papers assessing the impact of surgical effectiveness trials on healthcare. Two researchers independently screened the papers for eligibility and performed a Risk of Bias assessment. Characteristics of both impact papers and trial papers were summarized. Univariate analyses were performed to identify determinants for finding research impact, which was defined as a change in healthcare practice. Results Sixty-one impact assessments were performed in 37 included impact papers. Some surgical trial papers were evaluated in more than one impact paper, which provides a total of 38 evaluated trial papers. Most impact papers were published after 2010 (n = 29). Medical records (n = 10), administrative databases (n = 22), and physician's opinion through surveys (n = 5) were used for data collection. Those data were analyzed purely descriptively (n = 3), comparing data before and after publication (n = 29), or through time series analyses (n = 5). Significant healthcare impact was observed 49 times and more often in more recent publications. Having impact was positively associated with using medical records or administrative databases (ref.: surveys), a longer timeframe for impact evaluation and more months

show abstract

Trends in publication of general surgical research in New Zealand, 1996–2015

Abstract: The quality and quantity of surgical research in New Zealand has substantially increased over the past two decades. These results reflect the successful growth of a culture of academic surgery and the ongoing support of partner organizations.

Cited by 10 publications

References 32 publications

Trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia, 2000–2020

Trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia, 2000–2020

Trends in the quality & quantity of otorhinolaryngology research in Australia: 1989–2018

Impact of surgical intervention trials on healthcare: A systematic review of assessment methods, healthcare outcomes, and determinants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About