AbstractBibliometric analysis of osteoarchaeology publications covering the period 2001–2007 in leading journals was carried out. The aims were two‐fold: firstly, to characterise research in this field in the UK and make comparisons with selected other countries, and secondly, to shed light on the use of skeletal collections. It was found that, since a previous survey of this type,covering the period 1991–1995, isotopic and DNA studies have increased. In the UK, work on biodistance studies is minor compared with other countries, and the proportion of palaeopathology work is high. In palaeopathology, substantial effort continues to be devoted to case studies, particularly in the UK where the frequency of problem‐orientated work directed at understanding earlier populations has not increased since the early 1990s. Although it is argued that the case study still has a place in osteoarchaeology, the balance of work needs to shift further in favour of population studies, particularly in the UK. Skeletal collections are vital for primary osteoarchaeological work, and there was little evidence for any great use of skeletal databases such as the Standard Osteological Database. Skeletal collections from the UK were the most used for the research papers analysed, demonstrating the importance of UK‐held collections for research that leads to high profile publication in the international scientific literature. These observations are pertinent since legal, ethical and practical issues in the treatment of human remains, particularly those connected with retention of skeletal collections, are now coming under closer scrutiny in the UK. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.