COVID-19 Pandemic and Impact on Research Publications in Critical Care.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated a significant transformation of scientific journals. Our aim was to determine how critical care (CC) journals and their impact may have evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the impact, as measured by citations and publications, from the field of CC would increase. DESIGN: Observational study of journal publications, citations, and retractions status. SETTING: All work was done electronically and retrospectively. SUBJECTS: The top 18 CC journals broadly concerning CC, and the top 5 most productive CC journals on the SCImago list. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For the top 18 CC journals and specifically Critical Care Medicine (CCM), time series analysis was used to estimate the trends of total citations, citations per publication, and publications per year by using the best-fit curve. We used PubMed and Retraction Watch to determine the number of COVID-19 publications and retractions. The average total citations and citations per publication for all journals was an upward quadratic trend with inflection points in 2020, whereas publications per year spiked in 2020 before returning to prepandemic values in 2021. For CCM total publications trend downward while total citations and citations per publication generally trend up from 2017 onward. CCM had the lowest percentage of COVID-related publications (15.7%) during the pandemic and no reported retractions. Two COVID-19 retractions were noted in our top five journals. CONCLUSIONS: Citation activity across top CC journals underwent a dramatic increase during the COVID-19 pandemic without significant retraction data. These trends suggest that the impact of CC has grown significantly since the onset of COVID-19 while maintaining adherence to a high-quality peer-review process.

Publication of pediatric theses defended at the Tunis Faculty of Medicine: A 15-year study.

INTRODUCTION: The valorisation of thesis through its publication is necessary to enhance its visibility. Few data exist concerning the characteristics of theses defended at the Tunis faculty of medicine. AIM: Examine the publication rate of pediatric theses and identify factors associated with an increased publication rate. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive bibliometric study of pediatric theses defended at the Faculty of Medicine of Tunis over 15 years, from 2006 to 2020. Theses were retrieved from the catalog of the faculty library. Publications had been searched in databases "Pub Med ", and "Google Scholar" until December2021. RESULTS: The study involved 235 pediatric theses. Sixty-eight theses were published, representing 29% of the total. The main topics of published theses were neonatology (16%) and hematology (15%). The language of publication was French and English in 55% and 45% of cases, respectively. All publications in Q1 and Q2 journals were written in English. The only independent factor predicting publication of theses was the very honourable mention with congratulations of the jury and proposal for the thesis prize (p=0,007). CONCLUSION: Additional assessments will be necessary to identify the obstacles to the publication of theses.

Fate of Pediatric Transport Medicine Abstracts 2011 to 2020: What Predicts Publication Success?

OBJECTIVE: Pediatric-neonatal transport research projects are presented at the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Section on Transport Medicine (SOTM) scientific abstract program annually. Journal publication increases the impact of these projects. Our objectives were to determine the publication rate of transport abstracts and to identify factors predictive of publication success. METHODS: We reviewed all AAP SOTM abstracts accepted for presentation from 2011 to 2020 and assessed presentation format (oral/platform vs. poster), authors' professional degree (physician vs. nonphysician), and first author's trainee status. We searched PubMed, Ovid, and ResearchGate for publications by abstract title and authors and then compared published versus unpublished abstracts. Categorical variables were expressed as proportions and compared using the chi-square test or the Fisher exact test, whereas continuous variables were summarized using medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) and compared using the Student t-test or the Kruskal-Wallis test as appropriate. A linear probability model was performed. RESULTS: Of 194 presented abstracts, 67 (34.5%) were published. The publication rate was significantly higher for oral/platform versus poster abstracts (P < .01), if the abstract was an oral/platform (probability increase by 19.5%, P < .01), and if the first author was a trainee (probability increase by 25.6%, p < 0.05). The constant was estimated as 24.9% probability of publication. Hence, if the first author was a physician, a trainee, and had an oral/platform presentation, there was an 85.8% chance of being published. The median (IQR) time to publication was 2 years (IQR: 2-4 years), with articles published the longest having the most citations. Articles were published in 27 different journals, with nearly half (33/67, 49.3%) being published in 3 journals. CONCLUSION: AAP SOTM abstracts have a 34.5% publication rate over the past 10 years, which is consistent with other medical specialties. Oral abstracts, physician first authors, and trainee first authors had a significantly higher success rate. Special emphasis should be placed nationally on supporting nonphysician transport professionals to publish their work.

A quantitative analysis of publication trends in Iranian medical ethics and a comparison with EMRO countries.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating publication trends in a research area helps assess organised scientific efforts in the particular academic field. This study aims to evaluate and compare trends in medical ethics publications in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMRO) countries. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to identify publication trends of Iranian and EMRO medical ethicists. Databases were searched, including Web of Sciences, Scopus, and PubMed for English language articles, which were published by countries in the World Health Organization EMRO regions. Iranian articles were searched in Persian and English language databases. The search strategy for the bioethics filter created by the Kennedy Institute of Ethics. Duplicate entries, tertiary publications and grey literature were excluded. All retrieved articles were categorised into ten main groups. Citavi software® was used for categorising and extracting articles' information. RESULTS: A total of 1835 English and Persian articles were obtained. Most (1211, 66%) Iranian publications in medical ethics were in Persian, and the rest (624, 34%) were in English. Most (306, 64.42%) of the published English articles in the EMRO region were authored by Iranian scholars, followed by those from Saudi Arabia (52, 10.95%), Oman (40, 8.42%), Pakistan (28, 5.89%), Lebanon (13, 2.74%), and Egypt (12, 2.53%). CONCLUSION: The results of this study show that the trend of publication of EMRO countries, especially Iranian publications, is insufficient to respond to national demands in medical ethics. A concept map has been presented to determine research needs in medical ethics. Focusing on national and regional research potentials could synergistically affect medical ethics progress in the EMRO region.

Productive scientists are associated with lower disruption in scientific publishing.

While scientific researchers often aim for high productivity, prioritizing the quantity of publications may come at the cost of time and effort dedicated to individual research. It is thus important to examine the relationship between productivity and disruption for individual researchers. Here, we show that with the increase in the number of published papers, the average citation per paper will be higher yet the mean disruption of papers will be lower. In addition, we find that the disruption of scientists' papers may decrease when they are highly productive in a given year. The disruption of papers in each year is not determined by the total number of papers published in the author's career, but rather by the productivity of that particular year. Besides, more productive authors also tend to give references to recent and high-impact research. Our findings highlight the potential risks of pursuing productivity and aim to encourage more thoughtful career planning among scientists.

K-Means clustering of dermatology journals: comparing the distribution of "free-to-publish" and "pay-to-publish" models.

This study investigates the impact of Free-to-Publish (F2P) versus Pay-to-Publish (P2P) models in dermatology journals, focusing on their differences in terms of journal metrics, Article Processing Charges (APCs), and Open Access (OA) status. Utilizing k-means clustering, the research evaluates dermatology journals based on SCImago Journal Rankings (SJR), H-Index, and Impact Factor (IF), and examines the correlation between these metrics, APCs, and OA status (Full or Hybrid). Data from the SCImago Journal Rank and Journal Citation Report databases were used, and metrics from 106 journals were normalized and grouped into three tiers.The study reveals a higher proportion of F2P journals, especially in higher-tier journals, indicating a preference for quality-driven research acceptance. Conversely, a rising proportion of P2P journals in lower tiers suggests potential bias towards the ability to pay. This disparity poses challenges for researchers from less-funded institutions or those early in their careers. The study also finds significant differences in APCs between F2P and P2P journals, with hybrid OA being more common in F2P.Conclusively, the study highlights the disparities in dermatology journals between F2P and P2P models and underscores the need for further research into authorship demographics and institutional affiliations in these journals. It also establishes the effectiveness of k-means clustering as a standardized method for assessing journal quality, which can reduce reliance on potentially biased individual metrics.

Analysis of the retraction papers in oncology field from Chinese scholars from 2013 to 2022.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the characteristics of retracted oncology papers from Chinese scholars and the reasons for retraction. METHODS: Data on retracted oncology papers from Chinese scholars published from 2013 to 2022 were retrieved from the Retraction Watch database. The retraction number and annual distribution, article types, reasons for retraction, retraction time delay, publishers, and journal characteristics of the retracted papers were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2695 oncology papers from Chinese scholars published from 2013 to 2022 had been retracted. The majority of these papers were published from 2017 to 2020. In terms of article type, 2538 of the retracted papers were research articles, accounting for 94.17% of the total number of retracted papers. The main reasons for retraction were data, result, and image problems, duplicate publication, paper mills, author- and third-party-related reasons, plagiarism, false reviews, and method errors. The retraction time delay for the retracted papers ranged from 0 to 3582 days (median, 826 days). The retractions mainly occurred within the first 4 years after publication. A total of 77 publishers were involved in the retracted papers. In terms of journal distribution, 394 journals were involved in the retracted papers, of which 368 (93.40%) were included in the SCI database. There were 243 journals with an impact factor of <5 (66.03%). CONCLUSION: In the field of oncology, the annual distribution of retracted papers from Chinese scholars exhibited first an increasing and subsequently a decreasing trend, reaching a peak in 2019, indicating an improvement in the status of retraction after 2021. The main type of the retracted papers was research article, and the main reason for retraction was academic misconduct. The retractions were mainly concentrated in several major publishers and periodicals in Europe and the United States. Most of the journals had low-impact factors.

[Scientific production in Scopus on financial health: period 2011-2022]. / Producción científica en Scopus sobre salud financiera: periodo 2011-2022.

INTRODUCTION: Financial health is related to the overall health of an individual and their family. The objective of this study was to evaluate the scientific production on financial health in the Scopus database for the 2011-2022 period. METHOD: Scoping review of manuscripts published in journals indexed in the Scopus database between the years 2011 and 2022. The following search terms were used: "Financial obligations", "financial inclusion", "family economy", "financial education", "financial literacy", "financial wellness" and "financial stress", which were entered in the Scopus search engine together with the Boolean operators (AND, OR).  Results: A total of 6 940 publications were identified, of which 81.95% were original articles. The United States was the country with the highest scientific production (35.5%). We identified a trend of increasing number of papers during the study period, especially from 2016 onward, with an 860% increase in 2022 (n=1429) with respect to 2011 (n=165). The journals with the highest number of publications were Sustainability (Switzerland) and the Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning (USA). Finally, the key search terms with the greatest yield were "financial inclusion" through the use of technology, "financial stress", "financial education" and "financial health." CONCLUSIONS: Research on financial health has increased significantly. The new knowledge on the subject is mostly driven by authors and institutions from the United States, and finally, there is evidence of an increasing trend of pulbications related to financial inclusion and financial education.

Introducción: La salud financiera, determinada en buena parte por el salario, está estrechamente relacionada a la salud global del individuo y su familia. Por ello se tuvo como objetivo evaluar la producción científica sobre salud financiera en la base de datos Scopus: periodo 2011 - 2022. Método: Scoping review en la que se analizaron manuscritos publicados en revistas indexadas en la base de datos Scopus entre los años 2011 - 2022. Para la búsqueda se utilizó descriptores tales como financial obligations, financial inclusion, family economy, financial education, financial literacy, financial wellness y financial stress. Se realizó una síntesis narrativa. Resultados: Se incluyeron 6 940 manuscritos, de los cuales el 82,0% eran artículos originales. Se observó un crecimiento constante del número de artículos a lo largo del periodo de estudio, especialmente a partir de 2016, con un incremento del 860% en 2022 (n = 1429) respecto a 2011 (n=165). Estados Unidos fue el país con mayor producción científica. Las revistas con mayor número de publicaciones fueron Sustainability (Suiza) y el Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning (EEUU). Entre los descriptores de mayor impacto se encuentran la inclusión financiera a través del uso de la tecnología, estrés financiero, educación financiera y salud financiera. Conclusiones: La investigación sobre salud financiera ha tenido un aumento significativo. El nuevo conocimiento sobre el tema es impulsado por autores e instituciones de Estados Unidos en su mayoría, y finalmente, se evidencian tendencias de estudio relacionadas a la inclusión y educación financiera.

Association of reviewer experience with discriminating human-written versus ChatGPT-written abstracts.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if reviewer experience impacts the ability to discriminate between human-written and ChatGPT-written abstracts. METHODS: Thirty reviewers (10 seniors, 10 juniors, and 10 residents) were asked to differentiate between 10 ChatGPT-written and 10 human-written (fabricated) abstracts. For the study, 10 gynecologic oncology abstracts were fabricated by the authors. For each human-written abstract we generated a ChatGPT matching abstract by using the same title and the fabricated results of each of the human generated abstracts. A web-based questionnaire was used to gather demographic data and to record the reviewers' evaluation of the 20 abstracts. Comparative statistics and multivariable regression were used to identify factors associated with a higher correct identification rate. RESULTS: The 30 reviewers discriminated 20 abstracts, giving a total of 600 abstract evaluations. The reviewers were able to correctly identify 300/600 (50%) of the abstracts: 139/300 (46.3%) of the ChatGPT-generated abstracts and 161/300 (53.7%) of the human-written abstracts (p=0.07). Human-written abstracts had a higher rate of correct identification (median (IQR) 56.7% (49.2-64.1%) vs 45.0% (43.2-48.3%), p=0.023). Senior reviewers had a higher correct identification rate (60%) than junior reviewers and residents (45% each; p=0.043 and p=0.002, respectively). In a linear regression model including the experience level of the reviewers, familiarity with artificial intelligence (AI) and the country in which the majority of medical training was achieved (English speaking vs non-English speaking), the experience of the reviewer (ß=10.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 18.7)) and familiarity with AI (ß=7.78 (95% CI 0.6 to 15.0)) were independently associated with the correct identification rate (p=0.019 and p=0.035, respectively). In a correlation analysis the number of publications by the reviewer was positively correlated with the correct identification rate (r28)=0.61, p<0.001. CONCLUSION: A total of 46.3% of abstracts written by ChatGPT were detected by reviewers. The correct identification rate increased with reviewer and publication experience.

Impact of Open Access status on journal metrics in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology - A cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: While Open Access (OA) journals provide free access to articles, they entail high article processing charges (APC), limiting opportunities for young researchers and those from low-middle income countries to publish OA. METHODS: Cross-sectional study, evaluating APC and academic impact of full OA (FOA) journals in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) compared to hybrid journals. Data were collected from Journal Citation Reports and journals' websites. RESULTS: Among 255 journals, median APC was 2850 (interquartile range [IQR] 1325-3654$). Median APC for 120 FOA journals was significantly lower than for 119 hybrid journals (2000, IQR 648-2767$ versus 3550, IQR 2948-4120$, p < 0.001). FOA journals had lower citation numbers and impact metrics compared to hybrid journals. CONCLUSION: While FOA ID/CM journals have lower APCs, they also lower academic impact compared to hybrid journals. These findings highlight the need for reforms in the publication process in view of achieving equitable data dissemination.

A Comparison of Plastic Surgery Authorship Trends Under Single Versus Double-Blinded Review.

INTRODUCTION: Research is key to academic advancement in plastic surgery. However, access to publication opportunities may be inequitable as seen in other fields. We compared authorship trends of plastic surgery manuscripts that underwent single-blinded review (SBR) versus double-blinded review (DBR) to identify potential disparities in publication opportunities. METHODS: Publications from two plastic surgery journals using SBR and two using DBR from September 2019 to September 2021 were evaluated. Name and institution of the article's first and senior author and journal's editor-in-chief (EIC) were recorded. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact analyses were used to compare author characteristics between SBR and DBR articles. RESULTS: Of 2500 manuscripts, 65.7% underwent SBR and 34.3% underwent DBR. SBR articles had higher percentages of women as first authors (31.9% versus 24.3%, P < 0.001) but lower percentages of first (50.7% versus 71.2%, P < 0.001) and senior (49.6% versus 70.3%, P < 0.001) authors from international institutions. First (26.0% versus 12.9%, P < 0.001) and senior (27.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.007) authors of SBR articles tended to have more plastic surgery National Institutes of Health funding. Journals using SBR tended to have higher rates of authorship by EICs or authors sharing institutions with the EIC (P ≤ 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: While associated with greater female first authorship suggesting potential efforts toward gender equity in academia, SBR of plastic surgery articles tends to favor authors from institutions with higher National Institutes of Health funding and disadvantage authors from international or lower-resourced programs. Careful consideration of current peer-review proceedings may make publication opportunities more equitable.

Mapping the landscape of medical research in the Arab world countries: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the productivity, performance, and impact of medical research in the Arab world countries. METHODS: We carried out a bibliometric analysis using Clarivate Analytics databases from January 2017 to March 2023. We reported research productivity, national and international research collaboration patterns, impact of Arab medical research output compared to the global average, top medical journals publishing Arab-affiliated research, and performance of the most productive Arab institutions. RESULTS: The Arab world contributed 2.72% to global medical research publication, with a citation impact of 11.98 compared to the global impact of 12.02. Qatar, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia led medical research publications per million population among Arab countries, ranking 26th, 36th, and 37th globally. Medical research publications increased by 87% annually from 2017-2022, with 70% of research originating from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. National collaborations accounted for 15% of Arab world publications, while international collaborations represented 66%. The median impact factor across the top 20 medical journals with Arab-affiliated authors was 5.14, with 50% being quartile one journals. The top 10 Arab-origin medical journals had a median impact factor of 3.13. Approximately 80% of the top 20 Arab institutions were academic, with a median publication count of 3,162.5 and a median citation impact of 14.5. CONCLUSION: The study provides insights into the state of medical research in the Arab countries, indicating room for improvement in the region's medical research.

Analysis of justification for author order and gender bias in author order among those contributing equally.

The practice of designating two or more authors as equal contributors (ECs) on a scientific publication is increasingly common as a form of sharing credit. However, EC authors are often unclearly attributed on curriculum vitae (CVs) or citation engines, and it is unclear how research teams determine author order within an EC listing. In response to studies showing that male authors were more likely to be placed first in an EC listing, the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) required that authors explain the reasons for author order beginning in 2020. In this study, we analyze data from over 2,500 ASM publications to see how this policy affected gender bias and how research teams are making decisions on author order. Data on publications from 2018 to 2021 show that gender bias was largely nonsignificant both before and after authors were asked by ASM to provide an EC statement. The most likely reasons for EC order included alphabetical order, seniority, and chance, although there were differences for publications from different geographic regions. However, many research teams used unique methods in order selection, highlighting the importance of EC statements to provide clarity for readers, funding agencies, and tenure committees. IMPORTANCE: First-author publications are important for early career scientists to secure funding and educational opportunities. However, an analysis published in eLife in 2019 noted that female authors are more likely to be placed second even when both authors report they have contributed equally. American Society for Microbiology announced in response that they would require submissions to include a written justification of author order. In this paper, we analyze the resultant data and show that laboratories are most likely to use some combination of alphabetical order, seniority, and chance to determine author order. However, the prevalence of these methods varies based on the research team's geographic location. These findings highlight the importance of equal contributor statements to provide clarity for readers, funding agencies, and tenure committees. Furthermore, this work is critically important for understanding how these decisions are made and provides a glimpse of the sociology of science.

DNP-Authored Articles in Peer-Reviewed Journals 2011-2021.

BACKGROUND: With an increasing number of doctor of nursing practice (DNP) graduates, the volume of peer-reviewed journal publications among DNP-prepared nurses is rising. PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to quantify, analyze, and categorize DNP-authored peer-reviewed journal publications. METHODS: A descriptive research design was used to analyze DNP-authored peer-reviewed journal publications in the WorldCat, EBSCO Discovery Service, and PubMed databases from 2011 through 2021. RESULTS: The 3839 journal publications included at least one DNP-prepared nurse author. There were 2495 (65%) publications with a DNP first author, 921 (24%) with a DNP solo author, and 2918 (76%) included publication collaboration. The majority of publications were practice- (40%), nursing- (17%), and education-focused (15%). Science translation in evidence-based practice and quality improvement publications accounted for 24%. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the proliferation of DNP-authored peer-reviewed journal publications, which may indicate an increase in the number of nursing care quality initiatives occurring in the clinical setting.

Emerging global trends and development in forensic toxicology: A review.

This study conducts a comprehensive analysis of forensic toxicology research trends, publication patterns, author's contributions, and collaboration. Utilizing the Scopus database, we scrutinized 3259 articles across 348 journals spanning from 1975 to 2023. Analysis employed diverse software tools such as VOSviewer, RStudio, MS Excel, and MS Access to dissect various publication aspects. We observed a notable surge in publications post-2007, indicating heightened research interest. Leading contributors included the United States, Germany, and Italy, with Logan B.K. emerging as the most prolific author. Forensic Science International stood out as the primary journal, publishing 888 articles and accruing significant citations. Keyword co-occurrences such as "forensic toxicology," "forensic science," and "toxicology" underscored core thematic areas in the field. Moreover, extensive research collaboration, especially among Western nations in Europe, was evident. This study underscores the imperative for enhanced collaboration between developing and developed nations to foster further advancements in forensic science. Strengthened partnerships can catalyze innovation, facilitate knowledge dissemination, and address emerging challenges, thereby propelling the field of forensic toxicology toward new frontiers of discovery and application.

Delayed publication of clinical trials in gynecologic oncology.

OBJECTIVES: Delays in clinical trial publication can hinder timely implementation of evidence-based practices. We sought to determine publication rates and time to publication for clinical trials addressing gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: All clinical trials addressing gynecologic cancers in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry with a primary completion date between 1/1/2018 and 1/1/2020 were identified. The primary outcome was publication rate. All included studies had been completed for at least 3 years. Secondary outcomes were time to publication and associations between publication rate and sponsor, cancer type, and the number and location of primary study sites. RESULTS: Of the 290 trials included, 161 (55.5%) had a peer-reviewed publication for the primary outcome within at least 3 years after completion. Of these, 123 had positive results (76.4%) and 38 were negative (23.6%). The average duration from primary completion to manuscript publication was 23.6 months (SD 13.9; median 21.4, IQR 15.1-32.4). Only 73 had results posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov registry (25.2%). Studies with positive findings had a significantly faster time to publication than those with negative results (22.0 mo vs 29.0 mo, p = 0.009). There was no significant difference between publication rate and funding source, cancer type, or location and number of primary sites. CONCLUSIONS: Timely publication of clinical trials addressing gynecologic cancers remains an issue. Studies with positive findings were published faster than those with negative results, but the average publication time was still almost 2 years from trial completion. Further efforts should be made to identify and address barriers to clinical trial publication.

Gender Representation on Editorial Boards of JAMA Network Journals.

Objective: Underrepresentation of women on editorial boards of biomedical journals has occurred for decades. The JAMA Network Journals have substantial and broad impact on advances in the biomedical sciences. We sought to determine the current status of gender representation on editorial boards of the 12 JAMA Network Journals. Methods: The gender of each editorial board member of the 12 JAMA Network Journals was classified based on review of online sources. The percentage of women on each board (i.e., number of women relative to total members) was calculated and compared to gender equity and parity benchmarks. The gender equity benchmark for each journal was defined as the percentage of women physicians in the medical specialty reflecting the journal's content based on Association of American Medical Colleges data. The gender parity benchmark for all journals was defined as 50% women. Results: There was considerable variation in the representation of women on the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals relative to gender equity and parity benchmarks. Women were underrepresented on 50% (6 of 12) of boards relative to gender equity and 67% (8 of 12) of boards relative to gender parity. Conclusions: Women were found to be underrepresented on 50% or more of the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals. This finding reflects gender inequities in academic publishing and the broader biomedical enterprise, which limits advances in the biomedical sciences and health care. Those JAMA Network Journals that continue to underrepresent women on their editorial boards are urged to remediate this longstanding issue.

Publication performance of university maxillofacial surgeons in Germany.

The aim of this bibliometric analysis was to benchmark the publication activities of German university departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery. The publication performance of staff surgeons (chief and consultants), documented by first or last authorship, from 37 German university departments was captured over a 10-year period (January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019). All publications listed in PubMed were included. Additionally, the Impact Factor (IF) was determined. A total of 213 surgeons were identified, of whom 158 (74.2%) were publishing. The number of publications was 1,777, published in 311 journals. Publication activity ranged from an average of 23.3 publications per staff surgeon in the top-ranked department to 0 publications in the last-ranked. The same trend was observed for the total cumulative IFs (CIFs) per member (range from 56.2 to 0). The most common used journal was the Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery (19.7%), with focus on "dentoalveolar surgery" (24%) and "operative techniques and procedures" (28.3%). Women constituted 19.2% of the staff, contributing to 8.5% of the publications. The publication performance of German university departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery exhibits a high variance, which did not correlate with the number of personnel and could only be explained by different research motivations.