Authorship Patterns in the Orthopaedic Journals of Low-Income and Lower-Middle-Income Countries

• Published in: JB & JS open access 2023-10, Vol.8 (4)
• Main Authors: Young, Jason, Xie, Michael, Choi, Soy, Osazuwa, Isaiah, Robbins, Jordan, Bain, Paul A., May, Collin
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 2472-7245; 2472-7245
• DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00072

BackgroundExtensive research collaborations exist between researchers from high-income countries (HICs) and those from low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). Previous research has suggested that authors from LICs and LMICs are underrepresented as first and last authors in the orthopaedic literature on local populations, particularly in LICs. We present a bibliometric analysis of authorship solely in studies published in orthopaedic journals that are based in LICs and LMICs.MethodsThe Global Index Medicus was queried, and all articles published from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2021, in journals with a focus on orthopaedic surgery that were based in an LIC or an LMIC were included. Logistic regressions were calculated to assess the predictors of local authorship.ResultsOver 92% of studies included in our analysis had first or last authors from LICs or LMICs. In terms of study type, the majority (89%) of studies were clinical, although largely of low-level evidence (78% of clinical studies were case reports, case series, or descriptive studies). None received funding. LIC or LMIC first authorship and last authorship were less likely for most types of nonclinical studies. LIC or LMIC first authorship was more likely when there were more study authors. LIC or LMIC first authorship and last authorship were less likely when there were more countries affiliated with the study authors. Finally, when compared with studies with only LIC or LMIC authors, those with a combination of HIC and LIC or LMIC authors had significantly lower rates of LIC or LMIC first authorship (93.3% versus 62.5%) and last authorship (97.7% versus 70.8%).ConclusionsOur study presents one of the first analyses to assess authorship patterns in the orthopaedic literature of locally published journals in LICs and LMICs. Future studies are needed to contextualize our findings within a broader bibliometric landscape in order to better address the ongoing challenges to building research capacity in LICs and LMICs.Clinical RelevanceOur study highlights important observations regarding authorship in international, collaborative research in orthopaedics.