Orthopedic research productivity of KSA: First bibliometric analysis

Abstract

Purpose: Medical research is a crucial indicator of a nation's reputation and development. However, there are concerns about the limited orthopedic research in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Therefore, this study conducted bibliometric analysis to investigate orthopedic research output from KSA.

Methods: PubMed database for orthopedic articles, with a minimum of one KSA-affiliated orthopedic author published from the year 2000 onwards, was searched. This excluded duplicate articles, corrections, letters, editorials, commentaries, and brief communications. The titles of the included articles, publication years, first and corresponding authors' primary affiliations and countries, countries and institutes of research, and total citations were noted. Thereafter, year-wise research contribution, top contributing and collaborating nations, top contributing affiliations, study types, levels of evidence, journal distribution, their impact factor, h-index and quartile-related information, and citation trends were analyzed.

Results: The search strategy yielded 1047 eligible articles. An increasing trend in research contributions in recent years was observed, with the least number of articles (8) contributed in 2005 and the most (140) in 2023. The research was conducted in KSA for most articles (83.48%). Authors from Canada collaborated in 3.44% of the articles. King Saud University was the top contributing institution (17.38% of all articles). There were 66 (6.30%) basic science studies and 873 (83.3%) clinical studies. Among non-basic science studies, 84.51% had level IV evidence. Overall, 73.83% of articles had either first/corresponding or both authorships from KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors. The eligible articles were published in 303 journals, with a mean impact factor of 3.04 (range 0.4-51.1, 165 journals) and a mean h-index of 59.2 (range 1-367, 277 journals). Overall, 31.23% of articles with quartile information available were published in first-quartile journals.

Conclusions: The orthopedic research productivity in KSA is limited. However, there has been an increasing trend in orthopedic research in recent years. Nevertheless, the quality of clinical research, particularly the level of evidence, needs improvement. Therefore, further efforts should be made to strengthen research opportunities and encourage research participation among orthopedic and medical institutes.

Keywords: Author; Bibliometric analysis; KSA; Medical research; Orthopedic; Productivity.

Figure 1

Screening method of the current bibliometric analysis.

Figure 2

Trends in orthopedic publications by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors from 2000 to 2024.

Figure 3

Top ten research institutes with orthopedic research involving KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors.

Figure 4

Types of orthopedic research articles by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors.

Figure 5

a) Level of evidence of orthopedic clinical articles by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors. b) Distribution of articles' levels of evidence by year.

Figure 6

a) Distribution of the top ten departments conducting orthopedic research involving orthopedic authors in KSA. b) Overall distribution of orthopedic articles by subspecialty.

Figure 7

a) Distribution of articles by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors across journals. b) Journal quartile distribution of articles by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors.

Figure 8

a) Subject areas of journals publishing eligible orthopedic-related articles by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors. b) Subgrouping of subject areas of orthopedic journals publishing eligible orthopedic-related articles by KSA-affiliated orthopedic authors.

Figure S1

Figure S2