Ophthalmic Journals Research Articles

Geographic Representation of Authorship in Ophthalmic Research from Low- and Middle-Income Countries

ABSTRACT Purpose Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are underrepresented in ophthalmic research, despite carrying the highest burden of visual impairment. To assess the representation of local authors in global ophthalmic research, this cross-sectional, bibliometric analysis measured the proportion of LMIC-affiliated authorship in LMIC-based ophthalmic research. Methods We sampled original, primary research conducted in LMICs and published in 1 of 7 high-impact ophthalmic journals between 2017 and 2021. For each article, we extracted the number and name of country study site(s), country affiliation(s) of first and last author, proportion of LMIC-affiliated authors, funding sources, and study design. Results Of the 1,333 studies exclusively conducted in LMICs, 89.4% of first authors and 80.6% of last authors were exclusively LMIC-affiliated. Representation of LMIC-affiliated first authors were lower in studies based in low-income countries (25.0%) or in sub-Saharan Africa (26.5%), published in journals with higher impact factors (68.0% in Ophthalmology), funded by high-income countries (HICs) (41.4%), or conducted in both LMICs and HICs (27.1%). The United States, United Kingdom, and Australia had the 3rd, 6th, and 8th largest shares of last authors. There were only 12 single-country studies conducted in low-income countries, namely Ethiopia, the Gambia, Guinea, Liberia, the Niger, and Sierra Leone. Of these countries, only three held first authorship and one held last authorship. Conclusions Although LMIC-based ophthalmic research has demonstrated higher local authorship representation compared to other fields, underrepresentation can be exacerbated by country income level, journal “prestige,” and degree of HIC involvement. These discrepancies highlight the need for more equitable data ownership in global ophthalmic research.

Bibliometric Analysis of Ophthalmic Journals

The primary vehicle for reporting and testing advances in eye care is refereed ophthalmic journals, which can be characterized using targeted bibliometric analyses. To identify all ophthalmic journals and evaluate citation metrics relating to articles, journals, authors, institutions, and countries published therein. A bibliometric analysis was undertaken of all ophthalmic journals included in the Scopus database (Elsevier). The search was restricted to all article types published in ophthalmic journals in English from inception through November 18, 2022. After excluding general medical journals, journals published in a language other than English, and spurious titles unrelated to the ophthalmic field, the Scopus database was found to list 335 ophthalmic journal titles that have published 471 184 articles, constituting the data set for this analysis. The 20 most highly cited articles were identified. Rank-order lists by article count were assembled for journals, authors, institutions, and countries. An h-index for ophthalmic journal articles was derived from citations and article counts for each constituent of each category. The h-index for ophthalmic journal articles was determined to be 494. The journal with the highest h-index was Ophthalmology (h-index, 297). The journal with the greatest number of articles was American Journal of Ophthalmology (38 441 articles). The most highly cited article was by Quigley and Broman, 2006 (5147 citations), concerning the epidemiology of glaucoma. The author with the highest h-index for ophthalmic journal articles was Ronald Klein, MD (h-index, 126), and the most prolific was Carol L. Shields, MD (1400 articles). Johns Hopkins University (h-index, 215) was the institution with the highest h-index for ophthalmic journal articles, and Harvard University was the most prolific (10 071 articles). The United States was the nation with the highest h-index for ophthalmic journal articles (h-index, 444) and was the most prolific (180 017 articles). In this study, the most highly cited articles published in ophthalmic journals were revealed, as well as the leading journals, authors, institutions, and countries. While excluding ophthalmology articles in general medical journals, this investigation affords a means of identifying highly cited authors, institutions, and countries which individuals or institutions can use as a guide regarding contributions to the field.

Oculoplastic publication trends in general ophthalmology journals.

To examine the publication trend of oculoplastic articles throughout the last decade in general ophthalmology journals. A review of all abstracts published between January 2010 to December 2019 in general, clinical ophthalmic journals was conducted. Articles that were categorized as original articles in general and clinical journals were included in the study. Totally 10 281 abstracts were included. Of them 465 (4.5%) were oculoplastic publications. The mean number of annual-publications was 46.5 and the mean annual-rate of oculoplastic publications was 4.51%. A significant decreasing trend in the number of oculoplastic publication in the last decade was found (P<0.01, R 2=0.770). However, there was no significant change in the annual-rate of oculoplastic publications during the last decade (P=0.191, R 2=0.203). From the 465 oculoplastic articles: 179 (38.5%) were articles about eyelid diseases, 160 (34.40%) were about orbit diseases, 92 (19.80%) were about lacrimal diseases and 34 (7.30%) were about thyroid eye disease (TED). A significant decreasing trends in the number of orbital and eyelids publications were found (P<0.01, P<0.01). However, there were no significant changes in the annual-rate of orbital, eyelids, TED and lacrimal-diseases publications throughout the last decade. Oculoplastic subspecialty deals with a wide range of pathologies in different ages. However, less than 5% of the articles in general, clinical, high impact factor ophthalmology journals are about oculoplastic diseases. One of the best way for ophthalmologists from different subspecilties, nowadays, to be updated, is to read high-impact-factor, general ophthalmology journals. Therefore, it is important that those journals will include articles about breakthroughs in oculoplastic.

Women's Authorship of Reviews in Ophthalmic Journals Over Time.

Purpose:To investigate prevalence and trends in women's authorship of articles in ophthalmic review journals over 2 decades.Design:Literature survey.Methods:Total number of authors, and number and gender of first and senior (last-named) authors, were identified in all full reviews published in Prog Retin Eye Res, Surv Ophthalmol, and Curr Opin Ophthalmol for the calendar years 1999, 2009, and 2019. The gender of authors was assigned manually by multiple methods. The subspecialty area of each review was captured by keyword and text search. Country of origin was determined from attributions of first and senior authors.Results:The gender of 841 first and senior authors was assigned unequivocally for 471 articles (96%). The frequency of women's authorship rose significantly over time (1999, 2009, 2019) for both first authors (19%, 32%, 44%; P < 0.001) and senior authors (16%, 19%, 29%; P = 0.018). The number of single-author reviews decreased significantly over time (P < 0.001), as did the proportion of reviews with neither a first nor a senior woman author (P < 0.001). Women's first authorship increased over time for reviews on glaucoma (P < 0.001), while women's senior authorship increased for anterior segment/cataract (P = 0.036). The proportion of reviews with a woman first or senior author did not differ by country of origin (P = 0.887 and P = 0.520, respectively).Conclusions:Women's authorship of articles in ophthalmic review journals increased significantly over the 20-year period, but a gender disparity remained: in 2019, more than 55% of first authors, and more than 70% of senior authors, were men.

Whats new and important in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus

The authors will review the literature for articles of interest to the subspecialty of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus for the time period February 2020 to February 2021. Ophthalmic journals are prioritized but journals from other specialties such as pediatrics, neurology and general medicine will be included. The authors will summarize the key findings in the major topics of vision screening, amblyopia, refractive error, neuroophthalmology, retinopathy of prematurity, strabismus, cataract, glaucoma, genetics, retina, oculoplastics, uveitis and practice management. The presentations in these topic areas will give key take home points to audience members that have implications for clinical practice.

Publication trends in clinical ophthalmology journals in the last decade.

To examine the absolute number and the proportions of articles published in general high-ranked ophthalmology journals for each ophthalmic subspecialty during the last decade, and to examine the publishing trends over the study period. All original articles published between January 2010 and December 2019 in the selected general clinical ophthalmic journals were included in the study. All abstracts of original articles were reviewed and deemed to be related to 1 of the 11 ophthalmic subspecialties. Six journals and 10,232 abstracts were reviewed. Articles focused on medical retina were the most common in the last decade (35.22%) while articles focused on strabismus were the least common (2.11%). The total number of articles published per year decreased during the last decade (p < 0.01). There was a significant reduction in the number of publications per year focused on anterior-chamber (p = 0.012), cataract and refractive-surgeries (p = 0.014), oculoplastic (p < 0.01), and strabismus (p = 0.011). In each year during the last decade, the highest proportion of publications was focused on medical retina while the lowest proportion of publications in most of the years was focused on strabismus. There was a significant decrease during the years in the proportion of articles focused on oculoplastic (p < 0.01). During the last decade, there have been differences in the proportion of publications of different ophthalmology subspecialties in high impact factor journals. This probably derives from demographic changes and advances in diagnosis and treatment. The proportion of articles focused on medical retina was the highest during all years while the proportion of articles focused on strabismus was consistently the lowest.

Evidence-Based Medicine in Ophthalmic Journals During Covid-19 Pandemic.

BackgroundCOVID-19 has erupted into our lives and forced rapid changes in all fields of medicine, causing a rush for publications that inevitably caused a shift away from the paradigm of evidence-based medicine (EBM). The objective of the present report is to assess and quantify this process.MethodsWe compared the levels of EBM of the publications in the ophthalmic literature on COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic and compared it to those of articles published the prior year during April 2019 for the three highest ranking journals in the field of comprehensive ophthalmology.ResultsCOVID-19 publications ranked significantly lower (p<0.001). Time between submission and acceptance was significantly shorter for the COVID-19 publications (p<0.001), and significantly more publications were accepted without revisions (P<0.001).ConclusionThough a shift away from EBM may be unavoidable in the early stages of a pandemic, we suggest that for the benefit of reliable information and informed decision-making, it is time to go back to EBM.

Comparison of the h-indices of the editorial board members of seven ophthalmic subspecialty journals

To investigate and compare the h-indices of the editorial board members of ophthalmic subspecialty journals. Descriptive Cross Sectional Research. Bibliometric indices were calculated for the editorial board members of seven ophthalmic subspecialty journals. Correlations between the median h-indexes and journal impact factors (JIF), average citations per article and JIF, and publication count and JIF were analyzed. The median h-indices of the board members of Retina, Journal of Glaucoma, Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, Cornea, Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Journal of Neuroophthalmology and Journal of the American Academy of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (J AAPOS) were 34, 26, 23, 17, 15, 14 and 13, respectively. H-indices and publication count were correlated with JIF (P<0.05, for each). The board members of Retina have the highest h-index and average citations per article, and J AAPOS have the least. These data provide useful benchmarks for comparison of the various subspecialty areas in ophthalmology.

Romanian ophthalmologists in the renowned ophthalmic journals worldwide

The authors are discussing over 80 articles that they have published in the last 5 years in the renowned ophthalmic journals worldwide, which have approached, for the first time in the ophthalmic literature, the following 4 topics: the acute central/ hemicentral retinal vein occlusion, the therapeutic interventions in the fellow eye of patients with unilateral malignant glaucoma, the persistent diabetic macular edema, and the current researches in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

What's new and important in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus in 2018

The authors will investigate the literature for articles of interest to the sub-specialty of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus for the time period March 2017 to February 2018. Ophthalmic journals are stressed but journals from other specialties such as pediatrics, neurology and comprehensive medicine will be included. The authors will summarize the key findings in the major topics including, but not limited to, vision screening, amblyopia, neuro-ophthalmology, retinopathy of prematurity, strabismus, cataract, glaucoma, genetics, retina, orbit, uveitis and practice management. The presentations in these topic areas will summarize and emphasize second-order analyses of the material.

What's new and important in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus in 2017

The authors will investigate the literature for articles of interest to the subspecialty of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus for the time period March 2016-February 2017. Ophthalmic journals are stressed but journals from other specialties such as pediatrics, neurology, and comprehensive medicine will be included. Key findings will be summarized in the major topics, including, but not limited to vision screening, amblyopia, neuro-ophthalmology, retinopathy of prematurity, strabismus, cataract, glaucoma, genetics, retina, orbit, uveitis and practice management. The presentations will summarize and emphasize second-order analyses of the material.

Prof. Mingguang He: China has increasingly been recognized as the land for clinical research and innovation

Mingguang He ( Figure 1 ) is Professor of Ophthalmic Epidemiology at the University of Melbourne and Centre of Eye Research Australia. He completed medical school at the Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou followed by research training at Johns Hopkins University (MPH) and University College London (MSc and PhD). His research interests include clinical and epidemiological research, randomized trials, twin studies, and imaging technology. Dr. He has published more than 100 papers in the peer-reviewed literature and several book chapters. He has given more than 30 invited lectures at regional and international conferences. He serves as associate editor for Eye Science and an editorial board member for PloS One , International Glaucoma Review , and several Chinese ophthalmic journals. Dr. He has received several awards including a University College London Graduate Research Scholarship and Overseas Research Scholarship, Top 3 and Top 10 best poster awards from the World Glaucoma Congress in Vienna and Singapore, best paper presentation at the SEAGIG conference, and distinguished young scholar award from the National Natural Science Foundation. After the Zhongshan Medical Retina and Epidemiology Symposium, I was honored to have an interview with Dr. He. Here the interview goes.

Trends in impact factors of ophthalmology journals.

Purpose:To test whether there is an association between the growth in the number of ophthalmic journals in the past years and their mean and maximum impact factor (IF) as a common sign of scientific proliferation.Methods:Using data from the 2013 Journal Citation Report database a study of the major clinical medical fields was conducted to assess the correlation between the number of journals and maximum IF in a given field in the year 2013. In the field of ophthalmology, we examined the correlation between year, number of journals, mean IF and maximum IF in the field of ophthalmology throughout the years 2000–2013.Results:In the major medical fields, a positive correlation was found between the number of journals and the maximum IF (quadratic R2 = 0.71, P < 0.001). When studying the field of ophthalmology a positive correlation between the number of journals and mean IF (R2 = 0.84, P < 0.001) and between number of journals and maximum IF (R2 = 0.71, P < 0.001) was detected.Conclusions:Our findings suggest that the variation in the IF can be explained by the number of journals in the field of ophthalmology. In the future, the formation of additional ophthalmology journals is likely to further increase the IFs of existing journals.

CLAE to move to online format

CLAE to move to online format

Bibliometric trends in ophthalmology 1997-2009.

Aims:To track citation patterns in ophthalmic journals and contrast them with major medical and surgical journals from 1997 to 2009. In addition, we want to familiarize the ophthalmic community with bibliometrics indices.Materials and Methods:Data retrieved from Institute for Scientific Information and related websites include 2-year journal impact factor JIF, 5-year impact, Eigenfactor score, H-factor, Article Influence score, and SCImago factor.Results:JIF rose steadily around 10% annually in ophthalmic journals, and likewise for major medical and surgical journals. JIF correlated with recent bibliometric indicators like 5-year impact, H index, and SCImago factor but not with Eigenfactor. Ophthalmic journals publishing reviews, basic science, or large volume on broad range of topics ranked at the top for JIF, while subspecialty journals tended to have low JIF. JIF of subspecialty journal Retina rose from 0.740 (rank 23) in 2000 to 3.088 in 2007 (rank 6).Conclusions:JIF tends to rise annually by 10% in medical, surgical, and ophthalmic fields. Journals publishing reviews, basic science, or large volume on broad range of topics rank at the top for JIF. The rapid rise of JIF for Retina unlike other subspecialties that stayed status quo is multifactorial: Change in editorial policies (introduction of review articles and omission of case reports) and technological advances in the retinal field.

The role of Rebamipide ophthalmic suspension in management of dry eye disease

Purpose of review: Review of the drug Rebamipide, an ophthalmic suspension, in the treatment of dry eye and other ocular surface disorders. Method: An extensive literature search was done on articles published in various ophthalmic journals to review the work on the latest drug rebamipide and its role in treating dry eye and other ocular surface disorders. Recent Findings: Rebamipide is a novel drug for the treatment of dry eye disorders. It is a mucin-secretogogue, has a cytoprotective, anti-inflammatory effect and also suppresses the detrimental oxygen free radicals and helps in faster healing of epithelium. No major side effect has been noticed apart from dysguesia. Summary: Rebamipide is the latest drug introduced in the treatment of dry eye. It seems to be a safe and effective treatment in chronic and severe forms of dry eye particularly due to mucus deficiency. Key Words: Dry eye, Goblet cell, Microvilli, Rebamipide, Tear film

Accounting for standard errors of vision-specific latent trait in regression models.

To demonstrate the effectiveness of Hierarchical Bayesian (HB) approach in a modeling framework for association effects that accounts for SEs of vision-specific latent traits assessed using Rasch analysis. A systematic literature review was conducted in four major ophthalmic journals to evaluate Rasch analysis performed on vision-specific instruments. The HB approach was used to synthesize the Rasch model and multiple linear regression model for the assessment of the association effects related to vision-specific latent traits. The effectiveness of this novel HB one-stage "joint-analysis" approach allows all model parameters to be estimated simultaneously and was compared with the frequently used two-stage "separate-analysis" approach in our simulation study (Rasch analysis followed by traditional statistical analyses without adjustment for SE of latent trait). Sixty-six reviewed articles performed evaluation and validation of vision-specific instruments using Rasch analysis, and 86.4% (n = 57) performed further statistical analyses on the Rasch-scaled data using traditional statistical methods; none took into consideration SEs of the estimated Rasch-scaled scores. The two models on real data differed for effect size estimations and the identification of "independent risk factors." Simulation results showed that our proposed HB one-stage "joint-analysis" approach produces greater accuracy (average of 5-fold decrease in bias) with comparable power and precision in estimation of associations when compared with the frequently used two-stage "separate-analysis" procedure despite accounting for greater uncertainty due to the latent trait. Patient-reported data, using Rasch analysis techniques, do not take into account the SE of latent trait in association analyses. The HB one-stage "joint-analysis" is a better approach, producing accurate effect size estimations and information about the independent association of exposure variables with vision-specific latent traits.

Statistical analysis of ophthalmic diseases related randomized controlled trials published in SCI journals from mainland China

Background Recently,the number of randomized controlled trials on ophthalmic diseases that published in international journals from mainland China has increased gradually.There is no systematic summary in this field.Objective To systematically search and analyze the distribution of ophthalmic diseases related randomized controlled trials (RCT) published in SCI journals from mainland China up to November,2012.Methods The search was performed on Pubmed using “Ophthalmology”,“Eye” and all of their inferior subjective terms,with type of literature being limited as randomized controlled trial,and country as China.All retrieved papers were screened,data extracted and analyzed.Results There were 68 ophthalmic diseases related RCT papers published from mainland China since 1989.After 2005,the number of RCT papers from mainland China increased quickly with 7 in 2006,11 in 2009,and 15 in 2011.The 68 RCT papers were focused on cataract,optometry,glaucoma,corneal and conjunctival diseases,ophthalmic immune and pharmacology,and fundus diseases.The RCT papers were published in a total of 35 SCI journals including most kinds of ophthalmic journals such as Ophthalmology,IOVS and a few journals on other specialty.The journal Clin Experiment Ophthalmol had the maximum RCT papers from China (8 papers).The 68 RCT papers came from 26 departments in mainland China,mainly from the hospitals affiliated to medical university in Guangzhou,Beijing,Shanghai,Wenzhou and Hangzhou.Conclusions The number of ophthalmic diseases related RCT papers published in SCI journals from mainland China increased continuously.The papers were mainly focused on cataract,optomctry and glaucoma.The number of these papers,however,was still small and imbalance between districts existed. Key words: Randomized controlled trial; Ophthalmology; Mainland China; SCI journal; Evidence-based medicine

Scientific publications in ophthalmic journals from China and other top-ranking countries: a 12-year review of the literature

BackgroundEye diseases with increasing mortality are common health problems that affect people of all ages and demographic backgrounds. In this study, we study the publication characteristics in international ophthalmic journals of the US, the UK, Germany, Australia, Japan, and China.MethodsArticles published in 53 ophthalmic journals from 2000 to 2011 were retrieved from the PubMed database. We recorded the number of articles published each year, analyzed the publication type, and evaluated the accumulated and average impact factors (IFs), and the distribution of articles in ophthalmic journals in relation to IFs. The characteristics of publication outputs from China and other top-ranking countries were compared.ResultsThe total number of articles increased significantly during the past 12 years, with an increase of 51.0%. The growth in the annual number of articles from the US, the UK, Australia, and China showed a significantly positive trend. Publications from the US exceeded those from any other country and had the highest IFs, largest number of total citations of articles, and the most articles published in leading ophthalmic journals. During the past 12 years, China contributed 3.5% of the total publications, and the number of Chinese articles showed a more than 6-fold increase (from 99 to 605, R2 =0.947, P<0.001). The numbers of IFs and citations of articles originating in China were mostly lower than for other top-ranking counties.ConclusionsResearch on ophthalmic journals has maintained an upward growing trend from 2000 to 2011. Chinese ophthalmology research has developed rapidly, but the gap still exists between China and other top-ranking countries for the advanced level of research.

EYE: a journal to be proud of

Eye is the official journal of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists. It aims to provide the practising ophthalmologist with information on the latest clinical and laboratory-based research. Eye has evolved over the 25 years of the College of Ophthalmologists' existence. Peter Watson, the first editor-in-chief, describes some of its history below. EYE began its history in 1985 at the council meeting of the Ophthalmological Societies of the United Kingdom (OSUK) in the large committee room of the Royal Society of Medicine when Professor Ashton formally proposed the formation of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists. The OSUK's journal was the Transactions of the Ophthalmological Societies of the United Kingdom, which was one of the oldest of the world's ophthalmic journals established by Sir William Bowman in 1881. Its purpose was to record the discussions of the various societies throughout the UK, so disseminating up-to-date information on eye disease throughout the land. This it did successfully right though until 1986, when, as its title was no longer appropriate with the formation of the new college, the then editor, Patrick Trevor-Roper, changed the title to EYE. Volume 1 of the new journal appeared in 1987. Peter Watson became editor in the next year. For several years previously the Transactions OSUK had been open to those wishing to publish articles on topics that had not been presented at one of the meetings, but this rarely happened. To be certain of a high standard of articles in the new journal, steps were taken to ensure that all the named lectures of the various societies were published in EYE together with a selection of the best papers from the main meetings. As a consequence, excellent unsolicited articles were soon being submitted and the citation rate rose rapidly. The Cambridge Ophthalmological Symposium had occupied one issue of the Transactions OSUK since 1974. (Two of the previous three symposia had appeared as supplements to the BJO and the other as a book on ‘Corneal Graft Failure' in the CIBA symposium series.) As all those who contribute to the Cambridge Symposium are required to submit their paper for publication, this has ensured that everyone has access to an up-to-date, comprehensive summary of the science and clinical applications of the topic discussed in the previous year. For this reason the Cambridge Symposium continues to publish its transactions in full in EYE.' Ian Rennie was the second editor of Eye and successfully negotiated its transition from a paper-based journal, run from a filing cabinet in his office, (!) to an online journal with an electronic workflow managed by Nature Publishing Group. The third and current editor-in-chief is Andrew Lotery. During his tenure, submissions continue to increase, with approximately 100 manuscripts being submitted per month for consideration for publication. Consistent with other leading journals, only the best papers are accepted with a current acceptance rate of 25%. However, despite the increased number of submissions, the time to review decisions being made has progressively decreased. Currently the median time to first decision is 39 days and the average time to online (and citable) publication is 27 days. This is due to the tireless work of the international editorial board and the reviewers. Moving with the times, Eye now publishes podcasts, provides electronic continuing professional development, and receives over 2 million page views per year online. In an associated web focus to this editorial, see www.nature.com/eye/focus/anniversary/index.html, the three editor-in-chiefs of Eye have highlighted 15 of the best papers published in Eye over the last 25 years. I encourage you to go online and review them. They include some of the seminal first descriptions of limbal stem cells, the pathophysiology of macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and ischaemic optic neuropathy, as well as ground-breaking clinical papers on topics such as trabeculectomies and pharmacogenomics. They also highlight the power of the NHS to achieve worthwhile clinical studies with data sets of over 55 000 patients. We congratulate the College on its 25th anniversary. Looking forward, Eye will continue, like the Royal College of Ophthalmologists, to innovate with the times. Its focus will continue to be aimed at publishing the best clinical and laboratory-based research. Consequently, we hope members of the Royal College of Ophthalmology will feel justly proud of their journal.