ReviewJournal of orthopaedics
Characteristics and trends of the most cited papers in robotic assisted arthroplasty.
Review in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research trends in total knee arthroplasty in India: a five-year bibliometric analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- The evolution of research in orthopedic robotic surgery: global trends and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO): A review of impactful papers in the literature.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Robotic-Assisted Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Bibliometric Analysis Using the Scopus Database.Cureus · 2024Review
- Technology and orthopaedic surgeons.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compile and analyze the top 50 most frequently cited articles published on robotic-assisted arthroplasty, allowing clinicians to effectively identify the most influential literature pertaining to this topic. Methods: Guidelines set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews were used as the foundation for data collection and analysis. All papers pertaining to robotic-assisted arthroplasty were retrieved using the Scopus database. Data including: manuscript title, authors, total citation count, level of evidence, journal, publication year, and country of publication was extracted from a final list of articles. Results: The top 50 publications regarding robotic assisted arthroplasty were cited a total of 4530 times (including self-citations), with an average total of 91. The years with the most publications in the top 50 were: 2017, 2018, and 2019, producing 7, 6, and 5 papers, respectively. Only 4 papers in the top 50 were published prior to the year 2003. The most common level of evidence was level V, and the most common category was Clinical Outcomes (74%). The United States contributed half of the 50 articles, and Princess Grace Hospital and University of London were the most contributory institutions, each with 6 of the top 50 articles. Conclusion: This analysis provides a comprehensive review of the most cited and influential papers in robotic-assisted arthroplasty. Understanding these trends in the literature will ultimately pave the way for physicians and researchers to continue to innovate and research in a targeted manner as they gain an understanding of what has been studied and what remains inadequately explored. Level of evidence: 3.
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.