Search

BackgroundIn orthopaedic surgery and other fields, the effect of influential journal articles has been evaluated by their citation counts and their correlation with methodological quality.PurposeTo identify and characterize the 50 most cited articles on shoulder instability, examine trends in publication characteristics, and evaluate the correlation of citations with quality of evidence.Study designCross-sectional study.MethodsThe Web of Science and Scopus online databases were searched to identify the top 50 most cited articles on shoulder instability, based on the average number of citations from each database. Article characteristics were recorded, and level of evidence and methodological quality were assessed using the modified Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS), Jadad scale, and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Spearman correlation was used to evaluate relationships between citations or citation density (citations/y) and level of evidence or methodological scoring. Top cited articles from recent years were also aggregated.ResultsThe top 50 most cited papers had a mean ± SD number of citations of 381.5 ± 166.7, with a mean of 15.0 ± 8.8 citations/y. Overall, 15 articles (30%) were biomechanical/cadaveric studies, and 15 (30%) were case series. Only 3 (6%) were considered to have level 1 evidence. The mean ± SD mCMS was 54.4 ± 12.7, mean ± SD Jadad score was 3.1 ± 1.4, and mean ± SD MINORS score was 10.5 ± 3.3. There were no significant correlations between citation rank or density and methodological assessments. There were weak correlations between citation rank and publication year (r s = 0.32; P = .022) and between rank and level of evidence (r s = -0.38; P = .047). The correlation between citation density and publication year was moderate (r s = 0.70; P < .0001). There was no difference in citation density of the top 10 articles from 2010 to 2020 compared with the top 10 from the overall list (23.8 ± 5.3 vs 28.8 ± 9.5; P = .16).ConclusionInfluential articles in shoulder instability included a high proportion of biomechanical/cadaveric studies. The majority of top cited articles had lower evidence levels and poorer methodological quality without strong correlation with citations or citation density. There was a moderate correlation between citation density and year of publication.

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is one of the most important health issues around the world and a major risk factor for both type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and cardiovascular diseases. The etiology of MetS is determined by the interaction between genetic and environmental factors. Effective prevention and treatment of MetS notably decreases the risk of its complications such as diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. According to recent genome-wide association studies, multiple genes are involved in the incidence and development of MetS. The presence of particular genes which are responsible for obesity and lipid metabolism, affecting insulin sensitivity and blood pressure, as well as genes associated with inflammation, can increase the risk of MetS. These molecular markers, together with clinical data and findings from proteomic, metabolomic, pharmacokinetic, and other methods, would clarify the etiology and pathophysiology of MetS and facilitate the development of personalized approaches to the management of MetS. The application of personalized medicinebased on susceptibility identified genomes would help physicians recommend healthier lifestyles and prescribe medications to improve various aspects of health in patients with MetS. In recent years, personalized medicine by genetic testing has helped physicians determine genetic predisposition to MetS, prevent the disease by behavioral, lifestyle-related, or therapeutic interventions, and detect, diagnose, treat, and manage the disease. Clinically, personalized medicine is providing effective strategies for the prevention and treatment of MetS by reducing the time, cost, and failure rate of pharmaceutical clinical trials. It is also eliminating trial-and-error inefficiencies that inflate health care costs and undermine patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]