Scholarlink

Background and Aims <p>This study performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis comparing Indian and international highly-cited papers (HCPs) in the <i>Indian Journal of Orthopaedics (IJO).</i></p> Methods <p>The study used a bibliometric design to analyze HCPs published in the <i>IJO</i> between 2007 and 2024, a period selected based on the journal’s Scopus coverage. The Scopus database was used for its comprehensive coverage and robust citation analysis capabilities. All documents published in the <i>IJO</i> during this period were retrieved on June 20, 2025. The threshold for an HCP was set at 51 or more citations, as this indicates significant peer recognition and influence within the academic community. For each HCP, the following data was extracted: the title, publication year, and citation count; the country of origin (Indian or foreign); the study type (original article, review, conference paper, editorial, or letter); the subject focus (e.g., trauma, joint disorders, or infection); author and institutional affiliations; and collaboration patterns, defined as single-institution, national collaboration (two or more institutions within India), or international collaboration (institutions from different countries).</p> Results <p>The 54 HCPs accumulated 4697 citations, averaging 86.98 per paper. Indian HCPs, averaging 89.61 citations, predominantly comprised original articles and reviews focusing on trauma, joint disorders, and infection. Notably, 74% of Indian HCPs were single-institution studies, with limited international collaboration. In contrast, foreign HCPs, averaging 92.46 citations, exhibited a broader range of topics and more frequent national and international collaborations. Until 2011, Indian publications had a statistically significant lower mean difference in CPP (14.4 ± 2.0) compared to foreign publications (19.4 ± 3.9) with a p-value of 0.042; however, after 2011, this disparity vanished, with both Indian and foreign publications showing an 8.1 mean difference (± 4.2 and ± 4.4 respectively) and a p-value of 0.999.</p> Conclusions <p>Indian HCPs focus on localized clinical priorities and have lower collaboration rates than their international counterparts. To enhance the global impact and citation potential of Indian orthopaedic research, expanding national and international collaborations and diversifying research topics is crucial.</p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Bibliometric Analysis of Highly-Cited Papers of Indian Journal of Orthopaedics

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月5日

查看全文
  • Raju Vaishya,
  • Brij Mohan Gupta,
  • Abhishek Vaish,
  • Srinivas B S Kambhampati,
  • Vijay Kumar Jain,
  • Sudhir Shekhawat

摘要

Background and Aims

This study performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis comparing Indian and international highly-cited papers (HCPs) in the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics (IJO).

Methods

The study used a bibliometric design to analyze HCPs published in the IJO between 2007 and 2024, a period selected based on the journal’s Scopus coverage. The Scopus database was used for its comprehensive coverage and robust citation analysis capabilities. All documents published in the IJO during this period were retrieved on June 20, 2025. The threshold for an HCP was set at 51 or more citations, as this indicates significant peer recognition and influence within the academic community. For each HCP, the following data was extracted: the title, publication year, and citation count; the country of origin (Indian or foreign); the study type (original article, review, conference paper, editorial, or letter); the subject focus (e.g., trauma, joint disorders, or infection); author and institutional affiliations; and collaboration patterns, defined as single-institution, national collaboration (two or more institutions within India), or international collaboration (institutions from different countries).

Results

The 54 HCPs accumulated 4697 citations, averaging 86.98 per paper. Indian HCPs, averaging 89.61 citations, predominantly comprised original articles and reviews focusing on trauma, joint disorders, and infection. Notably, 74% of Indian HCPs were single-institution studies, with limited international collaboration. In contrast, foreign HCPs, averaging 92.46 citations, exhibited a broader range of topics and more frequent national and international collaborations. Until 2011, Indian publications had a statistically significant lower mean difference in CPP (14.4 ± 2.0) compared to foreign publications (19.4 ± 3.9) with a p-value of 0.042; however, after 2011, this disparity vanished, with both Indian and foreign publications showing an 8.1 mean difference (± 4.2 and ± 4.4 respectively) and a p-value of 0.999.

Conclusions

Indian HCPs focus on localized clinical priorities and have lower collaboration rates than their international counterparts. To enhance the global impact and citation potential of Indian orthopaedic research, expanding national and international collaborations and diversifying research topics is crucial.

Graphical Abstract