Cargando…
Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications
Bibliometric analysis of surgical research has become increasingly prevalent. Citation count (CC) is a commonly used marker of research quality, but may overlook impactful military research. The disruption score (DS) evaluates manuscripts on a spectrum from most innovative with more positive scores...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10389412/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37184517 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004009 |
_version_ | 1785082293931474944 |
---|---|
author | Dilday, Joshua Gallagher, Shea Bram, Ryan Williams, Elliot Grigorian, Areg Matsushima, Kazuhide Schellenberg, Morgan Inaba, Kenji Martin, Matthew |
author_facet | Dilday, Joshua Gallagher, Shea Bram, Ryan Williams, Elliot Grigorian, Areg Matsushima, Kazuhide Schellenberg, Morgan Inaba, Kenji Martin, Matthew |
author_sort | Dilday, Joshua |
collection | PubMed |
description | Bibliometric analysis of surgical research has become increasingly prevalent. Citation count (CC) is a commonly used marker of research quality, but may overlook impactful military research. The disruption score (DS) evaluates manuscripts on a spectrum from most innovative with more positive scores (disruptive [DR]) to most entrenched with more negative scores (developmental; DV). We sought to analyze the most DR and DV versus most cited research in military trauma. METHODS: Top trauma articles by DS and by CC were identified via professional literature search. All publications in military journals were included. Military trauma-related keywords were used to query additional top surgical journals for military-focused publications. Publications were linked to the iCite NIH tool for CC and related metrics. The top 100 DR and DV publications by DS were analyzed and compared with the top 100 articles by CC. RESULTS: Overall, 32,040 articles published between 1954 and 2014 were identified. The average DS and CC were 0.01 and 22, respectively. Most articles were published in Mil Med (68%). The top 100 DR articles were frequently published in Mil Med (51%) with a mean DS of 0.148. Of these, the most cited article was only the 40th most disruptive. The top 100 CC articles averaged a DS of 0.009 and were commonly found in J Trauma (53%). Only five publications were on both the top 100 DR and top 100 CC lists; 19 were on both the top DV and CC lists. Citation count was not correlated with DR (r = −0.134; p = 0.07) and only weakly correlated with DV (r = 0.215; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: DS identifies publications that changed military paradigms and future research directions previously overlooked by citation count alone. The DR and DV articles are distinct with little overlap between highly cited military articles. Multiple bibliometric measures should be employed to avoid overlooking impactful military trauma research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level IV. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10389412 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103894122023-08-01 Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications Dilday, Joshua Gallagher, Shea Bram, Ryan Williams, Elliot Grigorian, Areg Matsushima, Kazuhide Schellenberg, Morgan Inaba, Kenji Martin, Matthew J Trauma Acute Care Surg Original Articles Bibliometric analysis of surgical research has become increasingly prevalent. Citation count (CC) is a commonly used marker of research quality, but may overlook impactful military research. The disruption score (DS) evaluates manuscripts on a spectrum from most innovative with more positive scores (disruptive [DR]) to most entrenched with more negative scores (developmental; DV). We sought to analyze the most DR and DV versus most cited research in military trauma. METHODS: Top trauma articles by DS and by CC were identified via professional literature search. All publications in military journals were included. Military trauma-related keywords were used to query additional top surgical journals for military-focused publications. Publications were linked to the iCite NIH tool for CC and related metrics. The top 100 DR and DV publications by DS were analyzed and compared with the top 100 articles by CC. RESULTS: Overall, 32,040 articles published between 1954 and 2014 were identified. The average DS and CC were 0.01 and 22, respectively. Most articles were published in Mil Med (68%). The top 100 DR articles were frequently published in Mil Med (51%) with a mean DS of 0.148. Of these, the most cited article was only the 40th most disruptive. The top 100 CC articles averaged a DS of 0.009 and were commonly found in J Trauma (53%). Only five publications were on both the top 100 DR and top 100 CC lists; 19 were on both the top DV and CC lists. Citation count was not correlated with DR (r = −0.134; p = 0.07) and only weakly correlated with DV (r = 0.215; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: DS identifies publications that changed military paradigms and future research directions previously overlooked by citation count alone. The DR and DV articles are distinct with little overlap between highly cited military articles. Multiple bibliometric measures should be employed to avoid overlooking impactful military trauma research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level IV. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-08 2023-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC10389412/ /pubmed/37184517 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004009 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Dilday, Joshua Gallagher, Shea Bram, Ryan Williams, Elliot Grigorian, Areg Matsushima, Kazuhide Schellenberg, Morgan Inaba, Kenji Martin, Matthew Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
title | Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
title_full | Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
title_fullStr | Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
title_full_unstemmed | Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
title_short | Citation versus disruption in the military: Analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
title_sort | citation versus disruption in the military: analysis of the top disruptive military trauma research publications |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10389412/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37184517 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dildayjoshua citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT gallaghershea citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT bramryan citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT williamselliot citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT grigorianareg citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT matsushimakazuhide citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT schellenbergmorgan citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT inabakenji citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications AT martinmatthew citationversusdisruptioninthemilitaryanalysisofthetopdisruptivemilitarytraumaresearchpublications |