Cargando…

A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: The use of robotics in arthroplasty surgery has increased substantially in recent years. The purpose of this study was to objectively identify the 100 most influential studies in the robotic arthroplasty literature and to conduct a bibliometric analysis of these studies to describe their...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boddu, Sayi P., Moore, M. Lane, Rodgers, Bryeson M., Brinkman, Joseph C., Verhey, Jens T., Bingham, Joshua S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10277458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37342364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101153
_version_ 1785060285368762368
author Boddu, Sayi P.
Moore, M. Lane
Rodgers, Bryeson M.
Brinkman, Joseph C.
Verhey, Jens T.
Bingham, Joshua S.
author_facet Boddu, Sayi P.
Moore, M. Lane
Rodgers, Bryeson M.
Brinkman, Joseph C.
Verhey, Jens T.
Bingham, Joshua S.
author_sort Boddu, Sayi P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of robotics in arthroplasty surgery has increased substantially in recent years. The purpose of this study was to objectively identify the 100 most influential studies in the robotic arthroplasty literature and to conduct a bibliometric analysis of these studies to describe their key characteristics. METHODS: The Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database was used to gather data and metrics for robotic arthroplasty research using Boolean queries. The search list was sorted in descending order by the number of citations, and articles were included or excluded based on clinical relevance to robotic arthroplasty. RESULTS: The top 100 studies were cited a total of 5770 times from 1997 to 2021, with rapid growth in both citation generation and the number of articles published occurring in the past 5 years. The top 100 robotic arthroplasty articles originated from 12 countries, with the United States being responsible for almost half of the top 100. The most common study types were comparative studies (36) followed by case series (20), and the most common levels of evidence were III (23) and IV (33). CONCLUSIONS: Research on robotic arthroplasty is rapidly growing and originates from a wide variety of countries, academic institutions, and with significant industry influence. This article serves as a reference to direct orthopaedic practitioners to the 100 most influential studies in robotic arthroplasty. We hope that these 100 studies and the analysis we provide aid healthcare professionals in efficiently assessing consensus, trends, and needs within the field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10277458
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102774582023-06-20 A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty Boddu, Sayi P. Moore, M. Lane Rodgers, Bryeson M. Brinkman, Joseph C. Verhey, Jens T. Bingham, Joshua S. Arthroplast Today Original Research BACKGROUND: The use of robotics in arthroplasty surgery has increased substantially in recent years. The purpose of this study was to objectively identify the 100 most influential studies in the robotic arthroplasty literature and to conduct a bibliometric analysis of these studies to describe their key characteristics. METHODS: The Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database was used to gather data and metrics for robotic arthroplasty research using Boolean queries. The search list was sorted in descending order by the number of citations, and articles were included or excluded based on clinical relevance to robotic arthroplasty. RESULTS: The top 100 studies were cited a total of 5770 times from 1997 to 2021, with rapid growth in both citation generation and the number of articles published occurring in the past 5 years. The top 100 robotic arthroplasty articles originated from 12 countries, with the United States being responsible for almost half of the top 100. The most common study types were comparative studies (36) followed by case series (20), and the most common levels of evidence were III (23) and IV (33). CONCLUSIONS: Research on robotic arthroplasty is rapidly growing and originates from a wide variety of countries, academic institutions, and with significant industry influence. This article serves as a reference to direct orthopaedic practitioners to the 100 most influential studies in robotic arthroplasty. We hope that these 100 studies and the analysis we provide aid healthcare professionals in efficiently assessing consensus, trends, and needs within the field. Elsevier 2023-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC10277458/ /pubmed/37342364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101153 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research
Boddu, Sayi P.
Moore, M. Lane
Rodgers, Bryeson M.
Brinkman, Joseph C.
Verhey, Jens T.
Bingham, Joshua S.
A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty
title A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty
title_full A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty
title_fullStr A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty
title_short A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Most Influential Studies on Robotic Arthroplasty
title_sort bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most influential studies on robotic arthroplasty
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10277458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37342364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101153
work_keys_str_mv AT boddusayip abibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT mooremlane abibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT rodgersbryesonm abibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT brinkmanjosephc abibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT verheyjenst abibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT binghamjoshuas abibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT boddusayip bibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT mooremlane bibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT rodgersbryesonm bibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT brinkmanjosephc bibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT verheyjenst bibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty
AT binghamjoshuas bibliometricanalysisofthetop100mostinfluentialstudiesonroboticarthroplasty