Levels of evidence in plastic surgery—bibliometric trends and comparison with five other surgical specialties

European Journal of Plastic Surgery

Volumn 39, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 365-370

  Agha, Riaz A ^a   Devesa, Mariana ^b   Whitehurst, Katharine ^c   Fowler, Alexander J ^d   Coe, Robert ^e   Wellstead, Georgina ^f   Orgill, Dennis P ^g   McCulloch, Peter ^h  

^a BALLIOL COLLEGE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^d GUY'S AND ST THOMAS' NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^e QUEEN S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^f QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^g BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Evidence based medicine; Levels of evidence; Research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIBLIOMETRICS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; EAR NOSE THROAT SURGERY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY; NEUROSURGERY; ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY; PATIENT SAFETY; PLASTIC SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPECIALIZATION; TREND STUDY; VASCULAR SURGERY;

EID: 84978630862     PISSN: 0930343X     EISSN: 14350130     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00238-016-1219-1     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312:71–2
2. ASPS Evidence Rating Scales [online]. Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/medical-professionals/health-policy/evidence-practice/ASPS-Rating-Scale-March-2011.pdf (accessed 10 November 2014)
3. Rohrich RJ, Eaves FF III (2011) So you want to be an evidence-based plastic surgeon? A lifelong journey. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:467–472
4. Loiselle F, Mahabir RC, Harrop AR (2008) Levels of evidence in plastic surgery research over 20 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:207e–11e
5. Thomson Reuters. J Citations Rep [online]. Available at: http://thomsonreuters.com/journal-citation-reports/ (accessed 10 November 2014)
6. Amin M, Mabe M (2000) Impact factors: use and abuse. Perspect Publ 1:1–6
7. Becker A, Blumle A, Momeni A (2013) Evidence-based plastic and reconstructive surgery: developments over two decades. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(4):657e–663e
8. Post SF, Selles RW, McGrouther DA, Ritt MJPF, Hovius SER, Fridén J, Walbeehm ET (2014) Levels of evidence and quality of randomized controlled trials in hand and wrist surgery: an analysis of two major hand surgery journals. J Hand Surg Eur 39:900–902
9. Chuback JE, Varley TL, Yarascavitch BA, Eaves F, Thoma A, Bhandari M (2013) The level of evidence presented at plastic surgery meetings: what do we have to learn? Plast Reconstr Surg 131:776–783
10. Bhangu A, Fitzgerald JE, Kolias AG (2014) Trainee-led research collaboratives: a novel model for delivering multi-centre studies. ANZ J Surg 84(12):902–3
11. Reconstructive Surgery Trials Network [online]. Available at: www.reconstructivesurgerytrialsnetwork.com (accessed 4 December 2014)
12. Academic Surgical Collaborative [online]. Available at: www.surgicalcollaborative.com (accessed 4 December 2014)
13. Agha RA, Camm CF, Edison E, Orgill DP (2013) The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery needs improvement: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:447–452
14. Agha RA, Camm CF, Doganay E, Edison E, Siddiqui MRS, Orgill DP (2013) Randomised controlled trials in plastic surgery: a systematic review of reporting quality. Eur J Plast Surg 37:55–62
15. Agha R, Lee S, Jeong KJL, Fowler A and Orgill DP (2015) Reporting Quality of Observational studies in plastic surgery needs improvement: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg (article in press)
16. Agha RA, Fowler AJ, Herlin C, Goodacre T, Orgill DP (2015) Use of autologous fat grafting for reconstruction post-mastectomy and breast conserving surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 68(2):143–61
17. Balliol College. Reporting guidelines for case series [online]. Available at: http://www.balliol.ox.ac.uk/bii/reporting-guideliness-for-case-series (accessed 4 December 2014)
18. Equator Network. Preferred reporting of case series [online]. Available at: http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/#23 (accessed 4 December 2014)
19. Time for a new approach to case reports. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2010;1(1):1–3
20. Agha RA, Goodacre T, Orgill DP (2013) Use of autologous fat grafting for reconstruction post-mastectomy and breast conserving surgery: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open 3(10), e003709
21. Agha RA, Gundogan B, Fowler AJ, Bragg TWH, Orgill DP (2014) The efficacy of the Cook-Swartz implantable Doppler in the detection of free flap compromise: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open 4, e004253
22. Sullivan D, Chung K, Eaves FF Rohrich RJ (2011) The level of evidence pyramid indicating levels of evidence in plastic and reconstructive surgery articles. Plast Reconstr Surg ;311–314
23. Agha R, Cooper D, Muir G (2007) The reporting quality of randomised controlled trials in surgery: a systematic review. Int J Surg 5(6):413–422
24. Hirst A, Agha RA, Rosin D, McCulloch P (2013) How can we improve surgical research and innovation? The IDEAL framework for action. Int J Surg 11(10):1038–1042