Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May 24:55:200-206.
doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2020.05.015. eCollection 2020 Jul.

Comparative analysis of authorship trends in the Journal of Hand Surgery European and American volumes: A bibliometric analysis

Alexander W Peters  1 , Michael K Savaglio  1 , Zachary J Gunderson  1 , Gremah Adam  1 , Anthony J Milto  1 , Elizabeth C Whipple  2 , Randall T Loder  1 , Melissa A Kacena  1
Affiliations

Comparative analysis of authorship trends in the Journal of Hand Surgery European and American volumes: A bibliometric analysis

Alexander W Peters et al. Ann Med Surg (Lond). .

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to better understand the authorship publishing trends in the field of hand surgery. To accomplish this, a comparative analysis was completed between the European and American volumes of the Journal of Hand Surgery (JHSE and JHSA) over the past three decades. Well-established bibliometric methods were used to examine one representative year from each of the past three decades. The focus of the study was to examine changes in author gender over time as well as to compare authorship trends across the two volumes.

Materials and methods: All JHSA and JHSE publications from 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015 were placed into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Data was collected for each publication including the gender of first and corresponding authors, corresponding author position, corresponding author country of origin, number of credited institutions, authors, printed pages, and references. Countries were grouped by regions.

Results: A total of 450 and 763 manuscripts from JHSE and JHSA, respectively, met inclusion criteria. JHSE and JHSA both showed increases in most variables analyzed over time. Both journals showed an increase in female first and corresponding authors. JHSE and JHSA displayed a rise in collaboration between institutions and countries.

Conclusions: Both JHSE and JHSA display increasing female inclusion in the hand surgery literature, which has traditionally been a male dominated field. The observed increase in collaboration between institutions and countries is likely linked to advances in technology that allow sharing of information more conveniently and reliably than was previously possible. As further advances are made socially and technologically, hopefully these trends will continue, leading to faster and higher quality research being generated in the field of hand surgery.

Keywords: Authorship trends; Bibliometric; Comparative analysis; Gender.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Mei X., Zhu X., Zhang T. Worldwide productivity in the hand and wrist literature: a bibliometric analysis of four highly cited subspecialty journals. Int. J. Surg. 2016;28:8–12. - PubMed
    1. Gu A., Almeida N., Cohen J.S. Progression of authorship of scientific articles in the journal of hand surgery, 1985-2015. J Hand Surg Am. 2017;42(4):291. - PubMed
    1. Erikson C., Jones K., Tilton C. Association of American Medical Colleges; Washington, DC: 2012. Physician Specialty Data Book.https://www.aamc.org/download/313228/data/2012physicianspecialtydatabook... 2012.
    1. Filardo G., da Graca B., Sass D.M. Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994-2014) BMJ. 2016;352:i847. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Freedman J. Women in medicine: are we “there” yet? 2010. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/732197