Cargando…

An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to present characteristics and publication patterns of studies arise from orthopedic theses obtained from National Thesis Center; database in terms of publication years, study types, topics, level of evidence between 1974 and 2014. METHODS: Firstly, National The...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Koca, Kenan, Ekinci, Safak, Akpancar, Serkan, Gemci, Muhammed Hanifi, Erşen, Ömer, Akyıldız, Faruk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6197167/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27839943
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2016.03.001
_version_ 1783364704166477824
author Koca, Kenan
Ekinci, Safak
Akpancar, Serkan
Gemci, Muhammed Hanifi
Erşen, Ömer
Akyıldız, Faruk
author_facet Koca, Kenan
Ekinci, Safak
Akpancar, Serkan
Gemci, Muhammed Hanifi
Erşen, Ömer
Akyıldız, Faruk
author_sort Koca, Kenan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to present characteristics and publication patterns of studies arise from orthopedic theses obtained from National Thesis Center; database in terms of publication years, study types, topics, level of evidence between 1974 and 2014. METHODS: Firstly, National Thesis Center database was searched for orthopedics and Traumatology theses. The theses, which their summary or full text were available were included in the study. The topics, study types and quality of study designs were reviewed. Then theses were searched in the PubMed database. Journals of published theses were classified according to category, scope and impact factors of the year 2014. RESULTS: 1508 theses were included into the study. Clinical studies comprised 71,7% of the theses, while 25,6% of the theses were non-clinical experimental and 2,7% of the theses were observational studies. Clinical studies were Level I in 8,6% (n = 93) and Level II in 5,8% of the theses (n = 63). A total of 224 theses (14,9%) were published in the journals indexed in PubMed database from 1974 to 2012. Fifty-two (23,2%) were published in SCI; 136 theses (60,7%) were published in SCI-E journals and 36 theses (16%) were published in other Journals indexed in PubMed. CONCLUSION: The quantity and quality of published theses need to be improved and effective measures should be taken to promote quality of theses. Theses from universities and Training hospitals which did not allow open access, and; incomplete records of the National Thesis Center database were major limitations of this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6197167
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61971672018-10-24 An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates Koca, Kenan Ekinci, Safak Akpancar, Serkan Gemci, Muhammed Hanifi Erşen, Ömer Akyıldız, Faruk Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc Original Article BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to present characteristics and publication patterns of studies arise from orthopedic theses obtained from National Thesis Center; database in terms of publication years, study types, topics, level of evidence between 1974 and 2014. METHODS: Firstly, National Thesis Center database was searched for orthopedics and Traumatology theses. The theses, which their summary or full text were available were included in the study. The topics, study types and quality of study designs were reviewed. Then theses were searched in the PubMed database. Journals of published theses were classified according to category, scope and impact factors of the year 2014. RESULTS: 1508 theses were included into the study. Clinical studies comprised 71,7% of the theses, while 25,6% of the theses were non-clinical experimental and 2,7% of the theses were observational studies. Clinical studies were Level I in 8,6% (n = 93) and Level II in 5,8% of the theses (n = 63). A total of 224 theses (14,9%) were published in the journals indexed in PubMed database from 1974 to 2012. Fifty-two (23,2%) were published in SCI; 136 theses (60,7%) were published in SCI-E journals and 36 theses (16%) were published in other Journals indexed in PubMed. CONCLUSION: The quantity and quality of published theses need to be improved and effective measures should be taken to promote quality of theses. Theses from universities and Training hospitals which did not allow open access, and; incomplete records of the National Thesis Center database were major limitations of this study. Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 2016-10 2016-11-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6197167/ /pubmed/27839943 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2016.03.001 Text en © 2016 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. http://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 Article
Koca, Kenan
Ekinci, Safak
Akpancar, Serkan
Gemci, Muhammed Hanifi
Erşen, Ömer
Akyıldız, Faruk
An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates
title An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates
title_full An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates
title_fullStr An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates
title_full_unstemmed An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates
title_short An analysis of orthopaedic theses in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates
title_sort analysis of orthopaedic theses in turkey: evidence levels and publication rates
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6197167/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27839943
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2016.03.001
work_keys_str_mv AT kocakenan ananalysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT ekincisafak ananalysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT akpancarserkan ananalysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT gemcimuhammedhanifi ananalysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT ersenomer ananalysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT akyıldızfaruk ananalysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT kocakenan analysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT ekincisafak analysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT akpancarserkan analysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT gemcimuhammedhanifi analysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT ersenomer analysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates
AT akyıldızfaruk analysisoforthopaedicthesesinturkeyevidencelevelsandpublicationrates