gms | German Medical Science

Objectives/Interrogation: The relationship between financial and material support on the quality of hand surgery research remains unknown. Based on the increased resources likely required to perform high-quality research, we hypothesize that funding and other support is associated with higher levels of evidence in hand surgery research

Methods: We performed a systematic review of all articles published in the Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume over a 10-year interval, from January 2006 through December 2015. Papers were reviewed to determine the following: date of publication, volume/issue, category (clinical vs. non-clinical), number of authors, country of origin, and type of support received, if any. Clinical studies were further subcategorized into type and Level of Evidence from I-V. Support was defined as financial and/or material support as designated in the first page footer or text body of the paper and subcategorized into one of four categories (1) Industry (2) Education/Societal (3) Government or (4) Multiple, i.e. some combination of 1 through 3. Chi-square analysis was performed to determine the potential relationships between the aforementioned variables.

Results and Conclusions: 1792 studies satisfied inclusion over the study interval. Majority of studies were clinical (1,113; 62.1 %) versus non-clinical (679; 37.9%), and financial or material support was used in 515 (28.7%). Non-clinical studies received a significantly higher rate support than clinical studies (40.2% vs. 21.7%; Chi-square test P < 0.0001). Education was the most common support source (158), followed by industry (150), government (124), and multiple sources (83). Industry was more likely to support clinical studies, while education and government sources were more likely to support non-clinical studies (Chi-square test P = 0.015). Level I and Level III clinical studies were associated with higher levels of funding than Level II, IV and V studies (Chi-square test P < 0.0001). Prognostic studies were most likely to be associated with support, while therapeutic studies were least likely (Chi-square test P = 0.03). Studies from the United States were more likely than others to receive support (31.2% vs. 25.0%; Chi-square test P = 0.011).

Non-clinical studies are more likely receive financial or material support. Among clinical studies, prognostic studies and those with Level I and III evidence, and were mostly likely to receive support. Studies originating from the U.S. received the highest rate of support.