Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Foot and Ankle Research 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Worldwide productivity in the field of foot and ankle research from 2009–2013: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals

Authors: Xuyao Luo, Zhimin Liang, Feng Gong, Hongwei Bao, Li Huang, Zhiwei Jia

Published in: Journal of Foot and Ankle Research | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Significant growth has been observed in the field of foot and ankle research in recent years. However, bibliometric studies concerning the quantity and quality of articles published in foot and ankle journals are scarce. This study aimed to reveal the characteristics of national productivity in the field of foot and ankle research and to provide a general picture of foot and ankle research for surgeons and researchers.

Methods

Web of Science was searched for foot and ankle articles in 4 highly cited journals from 2009 to 2013. The number of total articles and citations were collected to evaluate the contribution of different countries. Publication activity was adjusted for the countries by population size and gross domestic product (GDP).

Results

A total number of 2083 articles were published worldwide. North America, West Europe, Australia and East Asia were the most productive world regions. High income countries published 90.35% of articles, middle-income 9.60%, and low-income just 0.05%. The United States published the largest number of articles (1025/2083, 49.2%), followed by the United Kingdom (221/2083, 10.6%), Australia (92/2083, 4.4%), and had the highest total citations (3631). However, Canada had the highest average citations per article (5.0), followed by Australia (4.6) and Switzerland (4.2). There were positive correlations between the total number of publications and population/GDP (p < 0.01). When normalized to population size, Switzerland ranked the highest, followed by Australia, and the United Kingdom. When adjusted for GDP, Switzerland ranked the highest, followed by United Kingdom, and South Korea.

Conclusions

The United States is the most productive country in the field of foot and ankle research. However, Australia, some smaller European and Asian countries may be more productive relative to their size.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Langer A, Diaz-Olavarrieta C, Berdichevsky K, Villar J. Why is research from developing countries underrepresented in international health literature, and what can be done about it? Bull World Health Organ. 2004;82:802–3.PubMedPubMedCentral Langer A, Diaz-Olavarrieta C, Berdichevsky K, Villar J. Why is research from developing countries underrepresented in international health literature, and what can be done about it? Bull World Health Organ. 2004;82:802–3.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Bakker IS, Wevers KP, Hoekstra HJ. Geographical distribution of publications in the scientific field of surgical oncology. J Surg Oncol. 2013;108:505–7.CrossRefPubMed Bakker IS, Wevers KP, Hoekstra HJ. Geographical distribution of publications in the scientific field of surgical oncology. J Surg Oncol. 2013;108:505–7.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Li Q, Jiang Y, Zhang M. National representation in the emergency medicine literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30:1530–4.CrossRefPubMed Li Q, Jiang Y, Zhang M. National representation in the emergency medicine literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30:1530–4.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Bould MD, Boet S, Riem N, Kasanda C, Sossou A, Bruppacher HR. National representation in the anaesthesia literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited anaesthesia journals. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:799–804.CrossRefPubMed Bould MD, Boet S, Riem N, Kasanda C, Sossou A, Bruppacher HR. National representation in the anaesthesia literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited anaesthesia journals. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:799–804.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Li Z, Qiu LX, Wu FX, Yang LQ, Sun YM, Lu ZJ, et al. Assessing the national productivity in subspecialty critical care medicine journals: a bibliometric analysis. J Crit Care. 2012;27:747. e741-745.CrossRefPubMed Li Z, Qiu LX, Wu FX, Yang LQ, Sun YM, Lu ZJ, et al. Assessing the national productivity in subspecialty critical care medicine journals: a bibliometric analysis. J Crit Care. 2012;27:747. e741-745.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Cheng T, Zhang G. Worldwide research productivity in the field of rheumatology from 1996 to 2010: a bibliometric analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013;52:1630–4.CrossRef Cheng T, Zhang G. Worldwide research productivity in the field of rheumatology from 1996 to 2010: a bibliometric analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013;52:1630–4.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Zhang WJ, Ding W, Jiang H, Zhang YF, Zhang JL. National representation in the plastic and reconstructive surgery literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70:231–4.CrossRefPubMed Zhang WJ, Ding W, Jiang H, Zhang YF, Zhang JL. National representation in the plastic and reconstructive surgery literature: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70:231–4.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Aluede EE, Phillips J, Bleyer J, Jergesen HE, Coughlin R. Representation of developing countries in orthopaedic journals: a survery of four influential orthopaedic journals. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:2313.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Aluede EE, Phillips J, Bleyer J, Jergesen HE, Coughlin R. Representation of developing countries in orthopaedic journals: a survery of four influential orthopaedic journals. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:2313.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Saxena S, Paraje G, Sharan P, Karam G, Sadana R. The 10/90 divide in mental health research: trends over a 10-year period. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;188:81–2.CrossRefPubMed Saxena S, Paraje G, Sharan P, Karam G, Sadana R. The 10/90 divide in mental health research: trends over a 10-year period. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;188:81–2.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Tong D, Wang L, Jiang J. Publications from China in The Lancet, NEJM, and JAMA. Lancet. 2013;381:1983.CrossRefPubMed Tong D, Wang L, Jiang J. Publications from China in The Lancet, NEJM, and JAMA. Lancet. 2013;381:1983.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Sreekar H, Dawre S, Lamba S, Gupta AK. Trend of India's contribution to the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;69:223.CrossRefPubMed Sreekar H, Dawre S, Lamba S, Gupta AK. Trend of India's contribution to the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;69:223.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Thordarson DB. Foot & Ankle International: the preeminent foot and ankle journal in the world. Foot Ankle Int. 2013;34:1189.CrossRefPubMed Thordarson DB. Foot & Ankle International: the preeminent foot and ankle journal in the world. Foot Ankle Int. 2013;34:1189.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Worldwide productivity in the field of foot and ankle research from 2009–2013: a bibliometric analysis of highly cited journals
Authors
Xuyao Luo
Zhimin Liang
Feng Gong
Hongwei Bao
Li Huang
Zhiwei Jia
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1757-1146
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-015-0070-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research 1/2015 Go to the issue