PURPOSE: The impact factors (IF) of orthopaedic journals is an important component in determining the future of orthopaedic research funding. We aim to characterise the trend in journal IF over the last decade and draw comparisons with other surgical specialties. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of impact factors from Journal Citation Reports between 2000 and 2010. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2010 the number of orthopaedic journals increased from 24 to 41, more than any other surgical specialty and the mean IF increased from 0.842 to 1.400. Journals printed in the English language had a significantly higher IF in the year 2010 (1.64 vs. 0.33, p = 0.01) than those printed in other languages. English language journals published in the US had significantly higher mean 2010 IF (1.932 vs. 1.243, p = 0.025) than those published in Europe, and this had changed compared with 2000 mean IF (0.978 Vs. 0.704, p = 0.360). Orthopaedics was ranked sixth out of 11 surgical subspecialties in 2000 but dropped to seventh out of 11 in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of orthopaedic journals has significantly increased over the last decade and this has been accompanied by a rise in mean IF. It is important that orthopaedics continues to improve the quality of research, which may help orthopaedic researchers secure funding in the future.
PURPOSE: The impact factors (IF) of orthopaedic journals is an important component in determining the future of orthopaedic research funding. We aim to characterise the trend in journal IF over the last decade and draw comparisons with other surgical specialties. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of impact factors from Journal Citation Reports between 2000 and 2010. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2010 the number of orthopaedic journals increased from 24 to 41, more than any other surgical specialty and the mean IF increased from 0.842 to 1.400. Journals printed in the English language had a significantly higher IF in the year 2010 (1.64 vs. 0.33, p = 0.01) than those printed in other languages. English language journals published in the US had significantly higher mean 2010 IF (1.932 vs. 1.243, p = 0.025) than those published in Europe, and this had changed compared with 2000 mean IF (0.978 Vs. 0.704, p = 0.360). Orthopaedics was ranked sixth out of 11 surgical subspecialties in 2000 but dropped to seventh out of 11 in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of orthopaedic journals has significantly increased over the last decade and this has been accompanied by a rise in mean IF. It is important that orthopaedics continues to improve the quality of research, which may help orthopaedic researchers secure funding in the future.
Authors: Kanu Okike; Mininder S Kocher; Jennifer L Torpey; Benedict U Nwachukwu; Charles T Mehlman; Mohit Bhandari Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-10-13 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Markus Rupp; Lydia Anastasopoulou; Elke Wintermeyer; Deeksha Malhaan; Thaqif El Khassawna; Christian Heiss Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Daniel D Bohl; Bryce A Basques; Nicholas S Golinvaux; Michael R Baumgaertner; Jonathan N Grauer Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-03-11 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Nequesha S Mohamed; Chukwuweike U Gwam; Jennifer I Etcheson; Nicole E George; Nicolas S Piuzzi; Samuel Rosas; Nipun Sohdi; Assem A Sultan; Anton Khlopas; Ronald E Delanois Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2018-04