Burn Surgery Bibliometric Analysis of Research Funding at American Burn Association-Verified Burn Centers.

Abstract

Evidence-based burn surgery and management rely on high-quality research to inform practice and policy. However, burn surgical research is costly, and the distribution of American Burn Association (ABA)-verified burn centers is unequal. This study examines the relationship between research funding, productivity, and ABA-verification in burn surgery. PubMed was queried for all burn surgery/reconstruction articles, collecting data on article title, funding, type, and affiliation. ABA-verified burn centers and their academic affiliations were identified via the ABA website and Google search. The query identified 16,138 burn surgery articles, with 3001 affiliated with US institutions and published in 1,785 journals. Notable journals include Burns (n=2,992) and Journal of Burn Care and Research (n=1,558). Only 16.6% of articles reported grant funding, primarily from non-U.S. government sources. High-level evidence (clinical trials and systematic reviews/meta-analyses) comprised 2.7% of articles but were more likely to be funded (32.4% vs. 16.1%, p<0.001). Articles from ABA-verified centers represented 13.5% of publications and were significantly more likely to receive funding (30.5% vs. 14.4%, p<0.001). ABA affiliation doubled the odds of research funding (OR: 2.014, p<0.001), and U.S.-based institutional affiliation increased funding odds by 122.8% (OR: 2.228, p<0.001). High level evidence comprises a minority of articles in burn surgery literature but are significantly associated with research funding. Furthermore, ABA-verified burn centers have a higher percentage of their research funded. While we are unable to elucidate whether ABA verification or research funding drives this phenomenon, it remains clear that high level burn surgery research, funding, and ABA-verification often coexist.