ArticleInternational orthopaedics2021
Opinion leaders in the medical community attract more attention than randomized controlled trials in shoulder surgery.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Orthopedic Healthcare Facility Governance Assessed with a New Indicator System.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Assessment of Patient Matters in Healthcare Facilities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Opinion seeking behaviour of healthcare providers in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
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
purposeThe objective of this study was to determine whether opinion leaders in the medical community attract more attention than randomized controlled trials (RCT) in shoulder surgery.
methodsA PubMed search to retrieve all therapeutic and diagnosis RCT shoulder studies was carried out. Three opinion leaders were chosen from among the last ten presidents of the European Shoulder and Elbow Society based on the number of publications. Their studies were also retrieved from PubMed. The metrics of the studies were determined through ResearchGate and Web of Science. The year of publication, impact factor of the journal, level of evidence, number of citations, number of reads, research interest, and reported conflicts of interest were recorded for every study.
resultsTwo-hundred forty-five shoulder RCTs and 236 opinion leader studies met the inclusion criteria. The opinion leader studies were read significantly more times than the RCTs (p = 0.04). The mean impact factor for RCT studies was 2.84 (SD 3.9) while it was of 1.99 (SD1.14) in the opinion leader group (p < 0.001). Most of the studies of the opinion leaders were level IV (73.3%), while only 6.3% of their papers were categorized as levels I-II. Conflict of interest was present in 19.6% of the RCTs and in 32.2% of the opinion leader studies (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe medical community pays more attention to opinion leader studies in shoulder surgery than to RCT studies even though RCTs are published in higher impact factor journals and opinion leader studies are mainly level IV evidence studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32813036What 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.