A bibliometric analysis of clinical research on fracture-related infection

Abstract

Background: Infection following orthopaedic trauma surgery is increasingly recognized as one of the major research priorities with as primary goal, improving patient care. This increased interest has been anecdotally recognized through published research, research grants, and, finally, with the development of the fracture-related infection (FRI) consensus group. In 2017, the accepted consensus definition of FRI was published, which has been followed by consensus recommendations from both a surgical and medical perspective. A bibliometric analysis was performed to objectively describe the trends in published clinical research related to FRI.

Methods: The terms related to FRI were searched in the Web of Science database between 2000 and 2020. The characteristics of clinical research on FRI regarding the author, country, journal, institution, scientific output, top 100 most cited articles, and trend topics were analyzed using Bibliometrix and WPS Office.

Results: A total of 2597 records were eligible for inclusion in this bibliometric approach, with studies originating from 89 countries, including eight languages. The United States of America (USA) published the highest number of articles and citations. International collaborations were present between 72 countries, with the most active country being the USA. The most contributive institution was the University of California. The highest number of papers and citations were from the Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured and the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. The top 100 most cited articles were published in 27 different journals, with the number of citations ranging between 97 and 1004. The latest trend topics were related to the diagnosis of FRI.

Conclusion: The present bibliometric analysis shows the research characteristics and trends of FRI from multiple perspectives. The fact that there is an increasing number of studies being published on FRI shows the agreement among scientists and clinicians that standardization with respect to this topic is very important.