Levels of evidence in pelvic trauma: a bibliometric analysis of the top 50 cited papers
- 50 Downloads
Scientific research is an essential aspect in the ongoing development of medical education and improved patient care. Dissemination of findings is a pivotal goal of any health research study. The number of citations that a published article receives is reflective of the importance that paper has on clinical practice. To date, it is unknown which journals are most frequently cited as influencing the management of pelvic trauma.
The aim of this study was to identify the top 50 publications relating to the management of pelvic trauma. The database of the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information (1945 to 2016) was reviewed to identify the 50 papers most commonly cited.
A total of 1535 papers were included. Of these, 31 papers were cited over 100 times with the top 50 cited 69 times or more. The top 50 were subjected to further analysis to identify the authors and institutions involved. The majority of these publications originated in the USA, followed by Canada. The most cited paper is “pelvic ring fractures—should they be fixed”, published by Tile in 1988.
We have identified and analysed the publications that have contributed most to the assessment and management of pelvic trauma over the past 50 years. We have also identified the researchers and institutions which have most influenced the evidence-based approach currently employed in the management of pelvic trauma.
KeywordsBibliometric analysis Levels of evidence Pelvic trauma
Compliance with ethical standards
No consent was required for this research.
There were no human or animal participants in this study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Santisteban D, Vega RR, Suarez-Morales L (2006) Utilizing dissemination findings to help understand and bridge the research and practice gap in the treatment of substance abuse in Hispanic populations. Drug Alcohol Depend 84(suppl. 1):594–601Google Scholar
- 5.Dunikowski LG, Freeman TR (2016) Impact of family medicine research: bibliometrics and beyond. Can Fam Physician 62:266–268Google Scholar
- 11.Garfield E (1999) Journal impact factor: a brief review. Can Med Assoc J 161:979–980Google Scholar
- 12.Saha S, Saint S, Christakis DA (2003) Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? J Med Libr Assoc 91:42–46Google Scholar