ReviewBMJ open2016
Scientific research output in orthopaedics from China and other top-ranking countries: a 10-year survey of the literature.
Review in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspective: Fragility Fracture Network in the Nordic Orthopaedic Federations countries - the role of orthopaedic surgeons.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Publications From Saudi Arabia in Orthopedic Surgery in the Recent Six Years: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Rise of Asian research in orthopaedic and sports medicine: a bibliometric analysis from 1996 to 2022.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Scientific publications on orthopedic surgery from three major East Asian countries (2012-2021).World journal of orthopedics · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review of Outcome Measures in Orthopaedic Trauma Trials: What Are We Measuring?Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2022Review
- Changing trends in clinical research literature on PubMed database from 1991 to 2020.European journal of medical research · 2022Article
- Assessment of Korea's Orthopedic Research Activities in the Top 15 Orthopedic Journals, 2008-2017.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2019Article
- Article
- Quality of randomized controlled trials of new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics identified in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI): a literature and telephone interview study.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
- Bibliometric study of the orthopaedic publications from China.International orthopaedics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOrthopaedics-related diseases and conditions are a significant burden worldwide. In this study, we aimed to compare the quantity and quality of research output in the field of orthopaedics from Mainland China (MC), USA, UK, Japan and Germany.
settingThe USA, UK, Japan, Germany and MC.
participantsWe selected orthopaedics journals from the subject category 'orthopedics' from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of publications, the number of publications in the surveyed publication types, impact factor (IF) and citations from the corresponding country from 2005 to 2014 were collected for quantity and quality comparisons.
resultsA total of 128 895 articles were published worldwide in orthopaedics-related journals from 2005 to 2014. The USA contributed the largest proportion (31 190 (24.20%)), followed by the UK (6703 (5.20%)), Japan (5718 (4.41%)), Germany (4701 (3.66%)) and MC (3389 (2.63%)). Publications from MC represented the fewest, but this quantity is rapidly increasing. The quantity of annual publications from MC has exceeded that of Germany since 2012. The USA plays a predominant role in all kinds of publication types under investigation in the study, except in the category of meta-analysis. MC was in the last place for cumulative IFs, and the average IF actually decreased from the beginning of the study. For total and average citations, MC still lags behind the other countries in the study.
conclusionsThe USA has occupied the dominant place in orthopaedics-related research for the last 10 years. Although MC has made great progress in the number of published works in the field of orthopaedics over the last 10 years, the quality of these publishing efforts needs further improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.