Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21073824›Full record

ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2011

Evidence-based surgery--evidence from survey and citation analysis in orthopaedic surgery.

Malhar Kumar, Chethan Gopalakrishna, Pazhayannur V Swaminath, Sanjay S Mysore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Malhar KumarHosmat Hospital, Bangalore, India. docmnkumar@gmail.com
Chethan Gopalakrishna
Pazhayannur V Swaminath
Sanjay S Mysore

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe results of a survey on evidence-based surgery (EBS) among members of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) and the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) are presented. The study also analyzes the citations earned by articles with different levels of evidence (LOE) to see if LOE have any bearing on the importance attached to the articles by authors and contributors to the journals. SUBJECTS AND

methodsThe questionnaire was e-mailed to 1000 randomly chosen consultant orthopaedic surgeons who were members of either the AAOS or the BOA. Participants were provided with the option of responding through web-based entry. For citation analysis, citation data were gathered from the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American volume) between the years 2003 and 2007 (5-year period).

resultsThe survey showed that awareness and access to EBS have improved greatly over the years. At the present time, these factors are not important barriers to the implementation of EBS in clinical practice in developed countries. There was a statistically significant difference in those with and without additional qualifications with regard to the approach to EBS. However, an equal percentage of surgeons with and without additional qualifications felt that it was difficult to adhere to EBS guidelines in daily clinical practice. Citation analysis showed that readers of professional journals attach importance to LOE category of the article and tend to cite level-I evidence articles more than other articles.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineAdultAgedBibliometricsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMiddle AgedOrthopedicsProfessional PracticeSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomUnited States

Identifiers

PMID21073824
PMCPMC3293308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.