Background: Standards for reporting surgical adverse events (AEs) vary widely within the scientific literature. Failure to adequately capture AEs hinders efforts to measure the safety of healthcare delivery and improve the quality of care. The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence and typology of perioperative AE reporting guidelines among surgery and anesthesiology journals. Materials and methods: In November 2021, three independent reviewers queried journal lists from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) portal (www.scimagojr.com), a bibliometric indicator database for surgery and anesthesiology academic journals. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 bottom quartile based on the journal impact factor. Journal author guidelines were collected to determine whether AE reporting recommendations were included and, if so, the preferred reporting procedures. Results: Of 1409 journals queried, 655 (46.5%) recommended surgical AE reporting. Journals most likely to recommend AE reporting were: by category surgery (59.1%), urology (53.3%), and anesthesia (52.3%); in top SJR quartiles (i.e. more influential); by region, based in Western Europe (49.8%), North America (49.3%), and the Middle East (48.3%). Conclusions: Surgery and anesthesiology journals do not consistently require or provide recommendations on perioperative AE reporting. Journal guidelines regarding AE reporting should be standardized and are needed to improve the quality of surgical AE reporting with the ultimate goal of improving patient morbidity and mortality.

Bibliometric analysis of academic journal recommendations and requirements for surgical and anesthesiologic adverse events reporting / Sholklapper, Tamir N; Ballon, Jorge; Sayegh, Aref S; La Riva, Anibal; Perez, Laura C; Huang, Sherry; Eppler, Michael; Nelson, Gregg; Marchegiani, Giovanni; Hinchliffe, Robert; Gordini, Luca; Furrer, Marc; Brenner, Michael J; Dell-Kuster, Salome; Biyani, Chandra Shekhar; Francis, Nader; Kaafarani, Haytham M A; Siepe, Matthias; Winter, Des; Sosa, Julie A; Bandello, Francesco; Siemens, Robert; Walz, Jochen; Briganti, Alberto; Gratzke, Christian; Abreu, Andre L; Desai, Mihir M; Sotelo, Rene; Agha, Riaz; Lillemoe, Keith D; Wexner, Steven; Collins, Gary S; Gill, Inderbir; Cacciamani, Giovanni E. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY. - ISSN 1743-9191. - 109:5(2023), pp. 1489-1496. [10.1097/JS9.0000000000000323]

Bibliometric analysis of academic journal recommendations and requirements for surgical and anesthesiologic adverse events reporting

Bandello, Francesco;Briganti, Alberto;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Background: Standards for reporting surgical adverse events (AEs) vary widely within the scientific literature. Failure to adequately capture AEs hinders efforts to measure the safety of healthcare delivery and improve the quality of care. The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence and typology of perioperative AE reporting guidelines among surgery and anesthesiology journals. Materials and methods: In November 2021, three independent reviewers queried journal lists from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) portal (www.scimagojr.com), a bibliometric indicator database for surgery and anesthesiology academic journals. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 bottom quartile based on the journal impact factor. Journal author guidelines were collected to determine whether AE reporting recommendations were included and, if so, the preferred reporting procedures. Results: Of 1409 journals queried, 655 (46.5%) recommended surgical AE reporting. Journals most likely to recommend AE reporting were: by category surgery (59.1%), urology (53.3%), and anesthesia (52.3%); in top SJR quartiles (i.e. more influential); by region, based in Western Europe (49.8%), North America (49.3%), and the Middle East (48.3%). Conclusions: Surgery and anesthesiology journals do not consistently require or provide recommendations on perioperative AE reporting. Journal guidelines regarding AE reporting should be standardized and are needed to improve the quality of surgical AE reporting with the ultimate goal of improving patient morbidity and mortality.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
bibliometric_analysis_of_academic_journal.44.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: PDF editoriale (versione pubblicata dall'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 359.19 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
359.19 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11768/148818
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact