The maintenance of quality and integrity in clinical
and basic science research depends upon peer review. This process
has stood the test of time and has evolved to meet increasing work
loads, and ways of detecting fraud in the scientific community.
However, in the 21st century, the emphasis on evidence-based medicine
and good science has placed pressure on the ways in which the peer
review system is used by most journals. This paper reviews the peer review system and the problems it
faces in the digital age, and proposes possible solutions. Cite this article:
The credibility and creativity of an author may be gauged by the number of scientific papers he or she has published, as well as the frequency of citations of a particular paper reflecting the impact of the data on the area of practice. The object of this study was to identify and analyse the qualities of the top 100 cited papers in orthopaedic surgery. The database of the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information (1945 to 2008) was used. A total of 1490 papers were cited more than 100 times, with the top 100 being subjected to further analysis. The majority originated in the United States, followed by the United Kingdom. The top 100 papers were published in seven specific orthopaedic journals. Analysis of the most-cited orthopaedic papers allows us a unique insight into the qualitites, characteristics and clinical innovations required for a paper to attain ‘classic’ status.
