Abstract
PURPOSE: Each year, the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) selects several abstracts for podium presentations during a "Best Papers" session. We examined these papers to better understand their characteristics and impact on the field of hand surgery. METHODS: "Best Papers" from the 2010 to 2020 ASSH Annual Meetings were reviewed. Online databases were searched to find matching publications. Descriptive data were collected from the publications. The Hirsch index value for each corresponding author and the number of citations for each publication were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Fifty-nine "Best Papers" were awarded during the study period. Forty-nine (83%) were clinical and 10 were basic science studies. A total of 39 observational studies, 11 human trials, 8 experimental studies, and 1 case series were present. Fifty-four (91.5%) were published at the time of our review. Twenty-six of those (48%) were multicenter studies, and the remaining 28 were from a single institution. The average time from presentation to publication was 16 months. The top three journals of publication were the Journal of Hand Surgery (33%), the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (9%), and the Journal of Hand Surgery, European (7%). The median level of evidence for all "Best Papers" was 3, with a trend toward a higher level of evidence during the study period. The average h-index value of all corresponding authors was 27.3. The average number of citations per publication was 37. CONCLUSIONS: The ASSH "Best Papers" were primarily clinical studies with an increasingly strong level of evidence and were likely led by an author with a history of research productivity. Selection as a "Best Paper" at ASSH Annual Meetings is a strong predictor of future publication and impact. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study evaluates the "value" of the best paper designation at the ASSH annual meeting.