ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Disruption in Wrist Literature: Identifying Paradigm-Shifting Publications.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Research in wrist surgery has advanced considerably, yet objective metrics of innovation remain limited. The disruption index (DI) offers a quantitative framework to identify papers that redirect scientific attention toward new directions, which traditional bibliometrics may overlook. Within this framework, this study aimed to examine trends in disruptive research over time. We hypothesized that DI would not correlate with citation count. Methods: A retrospective bibliometric analysis was performed using PubMed with wrist-specific search terms and limited to 14 selected orthopedic and wrist surgery journals. Each article was matched to its respective disruption scores in the publicly available Harvard Dataverse data set. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation. Temporal, authorship, and journal-level patterns were evaluated, and the top 10 most disruptive publications were identified. Results: A total of 4,138 wrist-related publications were identified and included in the analysis. Disruption scores were narrowly distributed around zero, with a mean of -0.008 ± 0.042, and were weakly associated with total citation counts (r = 0.049, Conclusions: This study applied the DI to wrist surgery literature. These findings provide new insight into how the field has progressed over time and suggest continued opportunities to pursue innovative, paradigm-shifting research. Type of study/level of evidence: Retrospective cohort study III.
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.