ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2018
Publishing Trends in Otology and Neurotology.
Article in Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Academic productivity and industry trends of fellowship-trained U.S. academic rhinologists.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2025Article
- Trends and patterns of neurotology drug prescriptions on a nationwide insurance database.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Article
- Clinical trials in otology: Examining trends and framework for prioritization.Journal of otology · 2021Article
- What do otolaryngologists want to learn? An educational targeted needs assessment study.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectives1) Describe publishing trends for otologic/neurotologic disorders over a 35-year span. 2) Compare trends in publishing with disease prevalence. 3) Evaluate changes in topic and journal specific ranking scores over time.
methodsPubMed searches were performed on 35 otologic/neurotologic disorders using medical subject headings (MeSH) terms from 1980 to 2015. Searches were limited in scope to the English language. A Mann-Kendall trend analysis evaluated changes in publication frequency as a discrete variable while correcting for total number of articles published per year. Scopus was used to identify SCImago Country and Journal Rank (SJR) indicator scores and weighted-averages used to calculate changes over time.
resultsThe total number of publications on the 35 topics increased from 853 in 1980 to a peak of 3,068 in 2013. Otitis media (τ = -0.799, p < 0.001) and Menière's disease (τ = -0.724, p < 0.001) showed strong decreasing publication trends. Temporal bone encephaloceles (τ = 0.743, p < 0.001) and cochlear implants (τ = 0.740, p < 0.001) showed strong increasing publication trends. Rapid rise in publications on superior canal dehiscence and vestibular migraine illustrate novel diagnoses. The weighted-average SJR score increased from 0.816 in 2000 to 1.160 in 2015 (p < 0.001).
conclusionThis study displays trends in the literature over the past 35 years that are often inconsistent with common disorders seen by otologists/neurotologists. Certain diagnoses that are currently being researched less commonly continue to impact patients with the same regularity. Quality of otologic/neurotologic literature has become more reputable with regards to SJR scores.
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.