Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Nov 11:15:37-41.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.11.001. eCollection 2021 Apr.

Research methodologic quality varies significantly by subspecialty: An analysis of AAOS meeting abstracts

Kimberly E Souza  1 , Jeremy Y Chan  2 , Sean T Campbell  3 , Julius A Bishop  4
Affiliations

Research methodologic quality varies significantly by subspecialty: An analysis of AAOS meeting abstracts

Kimberly E Souza et al. J Clin Orthop Trauma. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the level of evidence and study type of clinical abstracts accepted to the 2017 AAOS Annual Meeting based on subspecialty.

Methods: All clinical abstracts presented at the 2017 AAOS Annual Meeting were assessed by two independent raters for LOE and study type. Nonparametric statistics and chi-square test were used to compare LOE and study types between subspecialties.

Results: A total of 1083 abstracts met inclusion criteria. There was a significant difference in LOE of abstracts by subspecialty (p < 0.001). Shoulder/elbow, adult reconstruction knee, hand/wrist, and sports had the highest percentage of level I and II studies. The type of study also varied significantly by subspecialty (p = 0.005).

Discussion: Methodologic quality of clinical studies presented at the 2017 AAOS Annual Meeting differed significantly among subspecialties. Orthopedic researchers should look to the fields producing the highest quality studies in an effort to improve methodological quality.

Keywords: AAOS annual Meeting; Level of evidence; Research quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Figure demonstrating the method for assigning level of evidence in this study. From JBJS, Inc. Journals Level of Evidence, revised January 2015, adapted from OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group, “The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence,” Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bar chart demonstrating level of evidence by subspecialty, by decreasing proportion of higher quality studies.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Bar chart demonstrating study type by subspecialty.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Graph showing relationship between percentage of high quality studies and number of clinical studies accepted from each subspecialty.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Wright J.G., Swiontkowski M.F., Heckman J.D. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Jt Surg Ser A. 2003;85(1):1–3. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200301000-00001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Voleti P.B., Donegan D.J., Baldwin K.D., Lee G.-C. Level of evidence of presentations at American academy of orthopaedic surgeons annual meetings. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2012;94(8):e50–e51-5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01860. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Obremskey W.T., Pappas N., Attallah-Wasif E., Tornetta P., Bhandari M. Level of evidence in orthopaedic journals. J Bone Jt Surg Ser A. 2005;87(12 I):2632–2638. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00370. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levels of Evidence for Primary Research Question. JBJS, Inc.; 2015. https://journals.lww.com/jbjsjournal/Pages/Journals-Level-of-Evidence.aspx Accessed.
    1. Zaidi R., Abbassian A., Cro S. Levels of evidence in foot and ankle surgery literature: progress from 2000 to 2010? J Bone Jt Surg Ser A. 2012;94(15):1–10. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.01453. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources