Cargando…

Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals

BACKGROUND: In biomedical research, level of evidence (LOE) indicates the quality of a study. Recent studies evaluating orthopaedic trauma literature between 1998 and 2013 have indicated that LOE in this field has improved. The objective of this study was to determine the validity of one such study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luksameearunothai, Kitchai, Chaudhry, Yash, Thamyongkit, Sorawut, Jia, Xiaofeng, Hasenboehler, Erik A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7229577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32467732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-020-00246-6
_version_ 1783534791965016064
author Luksameearunothai, Kitchai
Chaudhry, Yash
Thamyongkit, Sorawut
Jia, Xiaofeng
Hasenboehler, Erik A.
author_facet Luksameearunothai, Kitchai
Chaudhry, Yash
Thamyongkit, Sorawut
Jia, Xiaofeng
Hasenboehler, Erik A.
author_sort Luksameearunothai, Kitchai
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In biomedical research, level of evidence (LOE) indicates the quality of a study. Recent studies evaluating orthopaedic trauma literature between 1998 and 2013 have indicated that LOE in this field has improved. The objective of this study was to determine the validity of one such study by 1) comparing our results and how they relate to more recent years of publications; and 2) assessing how our findings may be used to estimate future changes. METHODS: A total of 3449 articles published from 2013 to 2018 in The Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT); Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume (JBJS-Am); and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (CORR) were evaluated for their LOE. Articles published in JBJS-Am or CORR were classified as trauma or nontrauma studies; articles published in JOT were considered trauma studies. Articles were assigned a LOE using guidance published by JBJS-Am in 2015. RESULTS: The percentage of total high-level (level I or II) trauma and nontrauma articles published in JOT, JBJS-Am, and CORR decreased from 2013 to 2018 (trauma 23.1 to 19.2%, p = 0.190; nontrauma 28.8 to 24.9%, p = 0.037). JBJS-Am published the highest percentage of level-I trauma studies, and CORR published the lowest percentage of level-IV studies. JBJS-Am and CORR published higher percentages of level-I trauma studies and lower percentages of level-IV nontrauma studies than all trauma studies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results we cannot validate the findings of previous studies as we found the overall LOE of both trauma and nontrauma orthopaedic literature has decreased in recent years. JBJS-Am published a greater percentage of high-level studies than did JOT and CORR. Although the number and percentage of high-level studies published in JOT increased during the study period, it still lagged behind JBJS-Am and CORR.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7229577
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72295772020-05-27 Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals Luksameearunothai, Kitchai Chaudhry, Yash Thamyongkit, Sorawut Jia, Xiaofeng Hasenboehler, Erik A. Patient Saf Surg Research BACKGROUND: In biomedical research, level of evidence (LOE) indicates the quality of a study. Recent studies evaluating orthopaedic trauma literature between 1998 and 2013 have indicated that LOE in this field has improved. The objective of this study was to determine the validity of one such study by 1) comparing our results and how they relate to more recent years of publications; and 2) assessing how our findings may be used to estimate future changes. METHODS: A total of 3449 articles published from 2013 to 2018 in The Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT); Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume (JBJS-Am); and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (CORR) were evaluated for their LOE. Articles published in JBJS-Am or CORR were classified as trauma or nontrauma studies; articles published in JOT were considered trauma studies. Articles were assigned a LOE using guidance published by JBJS-Am in 2015. RESULTS: The percentage of total high-level (level I or II) trauma and nontrauma articles published in JOT, JBJS-Am, and CORR decreased from 2013 to 2018 (trauma 23.1 to 19.2%, p = 0.190; nontrauma 28.8 to 24.9%, p = 0.037). JBJS-Am published the highest percentage of level-I trauma studies, and CORR published the lowest percentage of level-IV studies. JBJS-Am and CORR published higher percentages of level-I trauma studies and lower percentages of level-IV nontrauma studies than all trauma studies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results we cannot validate the findings of previous studies as we found the overall LOE of both trauma and nontrauma orthopaedic literature has decreased in recent years. JBJS-Am published a greater percentage of high-level studies than did JOT and CORR. Although the number and percentage of high-level studies published in JOT increased during the study period, it still lagged behind JBJS-Am and CORR. BioMed Central 2020-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7229577/ /pubmed/32467732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-020-00246-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Luksameearunothai, Kitchai
Chaudhry, Yash
Thamyongkit, Sorawut
Jia, Xiaofeng
Hasenboehler, Erik A.
Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
title Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
title_full Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
title_fullStr Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
title_short Assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
title_sort assessing the level of evidence in the orthopaedic literature, 2013–2018: a review of 3449 articles in leading orthopaedic journals
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7229577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32467732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-020-00246-6
work_keys_str_mv AT luksameearunothaikitchai assessingthelevelofevidenceintheorthopaedicliterature20132018areviewof3449articlesinleadingorthopaedicjournals
AT chaudhryyash assessingthelevelofevidenceintheorthopaedicliterature20132018areviewof3449articlesinleadingorthopaedicjournals
AT thamyongkitsorawut assessingthelevelofevidenceintheorthopaedicliterature20132018areviewof3449articlesinleadingorthopaedicjournals
AT jiaxiaofeng assessingthelevelofevidenceintheorthopaedicliterature20132018areviewof3449articlesinleadingorthopaedicjournals
AT hasenboehlererika assessingthelevelofevidenceintheorthopaedicliterature20132018areviewof3449articlesinleadingorthopaedicjournals