RESEARCH
Application of the h-Index in Academic Plastic Surgery Paul J. Therattil, MD, Ian C. Hoppe, MD, Mark S. Granick, MD, and Edward S. Lee, MD Background: The h-index is a measure designed to assess the quantity and significance of an individual's academic contributions. The objective of this study was to determine whether the h-index of plastic surgeons correlates with academic rank and whether there is a difference based on academic rank, residency training model, sex, geographic region, faculty size, and departmental status. Methods: A database of all US academic plastic surgeons was created. The rank and sex of each surgeon were obtained, as were characteristics of their plastic surgery program. The Scopus database was queried to determine each surgeon's h-index. Results: The 592 plastic surgeons in our database had a mean h-index of 8.97. The h-index increased with academic rank: 4.59 for assistant professors, 9.10 for associate professors, and 15.30 for professors. There was no significant difference in the h-index between chairpersons and chiefs. Plastic surgeons on faculty in integrated plastic surgery programs had significantly higher h-indices (9.64) than those at traditional programs (6.28). Those who were on faculty at larger programs also had higher h-indices. Male plastic surgeons had higher h-indices (9.57) than did female plastic surgeons (6.07), although this was insignificant when taking other variables into account. There was no correlation between the h-index and location or departmental status. Conclusions: The h-index of plastic surgeons seems to correlate with academic rank and has potential as a tool to measure academic productivity within plastic surgery. Plastic surgeons on faculty in integrated plastic surgery programs, those at larger programs, and male plastic surgeons tend to have higher h-indices. The difference between sexes seems to be, at least in part, due to the higher number of men in high academic positions. There does not seem to be a regional difference with regard to h-indices or a difference with regard to departmental status. Key Words: academic productivity, academic promotion, academic rank determination, academic rank in surgical specialties, surgical faculty productivity, plastic surgery faculty productivity, h-index (Ann Plast Surg 2016;76: 545–549)
W
hen determining the performance of an academic physician, patient care, teaching, and research are among the most critical attributes surveyed. With regard to research, total number of publications, research grants, and mentorship are important factors. The gross number of a physician's publications, however, may produce a skewed picture of his/her academic contributions. Although each has its own place in the literature, the effort and influence of a successful randomized controlled trial are different from that of a published “Letter to the Editor.” For this reason, several indices have been developed to objectively assess an author's scientific achievement. The h-index is one objective measure used to determine how prolific an author is while taking into account the relevance of his/her publications. The h-index was first described by J.E. Hirsch in 2005. Inherent in the elegance of the measure is its simplicity: the h-index of an author is equal to the numbers of articles, h, that have been cited
Received July 23, 2014, and accepted for publication, after revision, October 6, 2014. From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers–New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ. Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared. Reprints: Edward S. Lee, MD, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers–New Jersey Medical School, 140 Bergen St, Suite E1620, Newark, NJ 07103. E-mail: [email protected]. Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN: 0148-7043/16/7605–0545 DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000382
Annals of Plastic Surgery • Volume 76, Number 5, May 2016
at least h times.1 The measure can be readily calculated for individual authors at several academic publication databases including the Scopus database (Elsevier), Web of Knowledge (Thomson's Institute for Scientific Information), and Google Scholar, among others. The various databases seem to have a high degree of correlation between their h-index calculations.2 The index was initially used mainly outside the medical literature, particularly in physics, but in recent years, its applicability in anesthesiology, emergency medicine, neurosurgery, radiology, radiation oncology, and urology has been tested and validated.2–7 Just as in other realms of academia, medicine cannot escape the political nature of promotion and election to prestigious societies and boards. Bibliometric measures give us tools to elucidate the criteria needed to make these difficult decisions. With the growing applicability of the h-index, committees determining promotion, tenure, research grant funding, and election to academic societies may incorporate such a measure into their evaluation of candidates. It is important in such a competitive academic environment for physicians to know where they stand with regard to their peers, not only for promotional purposes but also to determine whether their research contributions are adequately serving the academic community. To date, there is no thorough assessment of the h-index of academic plastic surgeons. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the h-index could be applied to plastic surgery to differentiate between academic ranks and to determine what other variables might affect the h-index.
METHODS A list of all plastic surgery residency programs in the United States, both integrated and traditional, was obtained from the Fellowship and Residency Interactive Database (FRIEDA Online), which is maintained by the American Medical Association. A list of the plastic surgery faculty was obtained from the Web sites of the 90 plastic surgery sections identified. Four programs were excluded because they did not publicly list the academic ranking of their faculty. This information was used to create a database of all board-certified academic plastic surgeons in the United States. The academic rank of each surgeon was recorded as assistant professor, associate professor, or professor. An additional note was made if the surgeon was the chief of the division or chairperson of the department. Therefore, professorial rank and position as section head were counted as 2 separate variables. Those surgeons whose primary title was listed as adjunct faculty, clinical faculty, or research faculty were excluded from the database. Other characteristics were obtained about each institution's plastic surgery section, including region, regional subdivision, size of the faculty, model of the residency program (integrated, traditional, or both), and departmental status. Region and regional subdivision of each section were determined analogously to US Census Bureau divisions (www.census.gov). The Scopus database was then queried in October 2013 by author name to determine the h-index and the number of publications of each of the plastic surgeons who met inclusion criteria. Those surgeons with common names often had multiple authors populated upon query of the Scopus database. The previous and current affiliations of each author were cross-checked with information from the institution's Web site to verify that the publications were being attributed to the correct author. When necessary, the field of the publications in question was also verified. www.annalsplasticsurgery.com
Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
545
Annals of Plastic Surgery • Volume 76, Number 5, May 2016
Therattil et al
TABLE 1. h-Index of US Academic Plastic Surgeons by Rank, Model of Residency Program, Sex, Faculty Size, and Departmental Status h-Index Mean ± SE
Academic rank Assistant professor (n = 268) Associate professor (n = 141) Professor (n = 183) Chief (n = 60) Chairperson (n = 22) Model of residency training program Integrated (n = 459) Traditional (n = 124) Sex Male (n = 491) Female (n = 101) Size of plastic surgery faculty Fewer than 6 faculty members (n = 191) Six or more faculty members (n = 401) Status of plastic surgery section Department (n = 187) Division (n = 405)
Median
Range
P
4.59 ± 0.24 9.10 ± 0.46 15.30 ± 0.68 13.60 ± 1.34 15.41 ± 2.08
4 8 14 11 14.5
0–24 0–26 1–65 2–65 5–43
Application of the h-Index in Academic Plastic Surgery Paul J. Therattil, MD, Ian C. Hoppe, MD, Mark S. Granick, MD, and Edward S. Lee, MD Background: The h-index is a measure designed to assess the quantity and significance of an individual's academic contributions. The objective of this study was to determine whether the h-index of plastic surgeons correlates with academic rank and whether there is a difference based on academic rank, residency training model, sex, geographic region, faculty size, and departmental status. Methods: A database of all US academic plastic surgeons was created. The rank and sex of each surgeon were obtained, as were characteristics of their plastic surgery program. The Scopus database was queried to determine each surgeon's h-index. Results: The 592 plastic surgeons in our database had a mean h-index of 8.97. The h-index increased with academic rank: 4.59 for assistant professors, 9.10 for associate professors, and 15.30 for professors. There was no significant difference in the h-index between chairpersons and chiefs. Plastic surgeons on faculty in integrated plastic surgery programs had significantly higher h-indices (9.64) than those at traditional programs (6.28). Those who were on faculty at larger programs also had higher h-indices. Male plastic surgeons had higher h-indices (9.57) than did female plastic surgeons (6.07), although this was insignificant when taking other variables into account. There was no correlation between the h-index and location or departmental status. Conclusions: The h-index of plastic surgeons seems to correlate with academic rank and has potential as a tool to measure academic productivity within plastic surgery. Plastic surgeons on faculty in integrated plastic surgery programs, those at larger programs, and male plastic surgeons tend to have higher h-indices. The difference between sexes seems to be, at least in part, due to the higher number of men in high academic positions. There does not seem to be a regional difference with regard to h-indices or a difference with regard to departmental status. Key Words: academic productivity, academic promotion, academic rank determination, academic rank in surgical specialties, surgical faculty productivity, plastic surgery faculty productivity, h-index (Ann Plast Surg 2016;76: 545–549)
W
hen determining the performance of an academic physician, patient care, teaching, and research are among the most critical attributes surveyed. With regard to research, total number of publications, research grants, and mentorship are important factors. The gross number of a physician's publications, however, may produce a skewed picture of his/her academic contributions. Although each has its own place in the literature, the effort and influence of a successful randomized controlled trial are different from that of a published “Letter to the Editor.” For this reason, several indices have been developed to objectively assess an author's scientific achievement. The h-index is one objective measure used to determine how prolific an author is while taking into account the relevance of his/her publications. The h-index was first described by J.E. Hirsch in 2005. Inherent in the elegance of the measure is its simplicity: the h-index of an author is equal to the numbers of articles, h, that have been cited
Received July 23, 2014, and accepted for publication, after revision, October 6, 2014. From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers–New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ. Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared. Reprints: Edward S. Lee, MD, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers–New Jersey Medical School, 140 Bergen St, Suite E1620, Newark, NJ 07103. E-mail: [email protected]. Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN: 0148-7043/16/7605–0545 DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000382
Annals of Plastic Surgery • Volume 76, Number 5, May 2016
at least h times.1 The measure can be readily calculated for individual authors at several academic publication databases including the Scopus database (Elsevier), Web of Knowledge (Thomson's Institute for Scientific Information), and Google Scholar, among others. The various databases seem to have a high degree of correlation between their h-index calculations.2 The index was initially used mainly outside the medical literature, particularly in physics, but in recent years, its applicability in anesthesiology, emergency medicine, neurosurgery, radiology, radiation oncology, and urology has been tested and validated.2–7 Just as in other realms of academia, medicine cannot escape the political nature of promotion and election to prestigious societies and boards. Bibliometric measures give us tools to elucidate the criteria needed to make these difficult decisions. With the growing applicability of the h-index, committees determining promotion, tenure, research grant funding, and election to academic societies may incorporate such a measure into their evaluation of candidates. It is important in such a competitive academic environment for physicians to know where they stand with regard to their peers, not only for promotional purposes but also to determine whether their research contributions are adequately serving the academic community. To date, there is no thorough assessment of the h-index of academic plastic surgeons. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the h-index could be applied to plastic surgery to differentiate between academic ranks and to determine what other variables might affect the h-index.
METHODS A list of all plastic surgery residency programs in the United States, both integrated and traditional, was obtained from the Fellowship and Residency Interactive Database (FRIEDA Online), which is maintained by the American Medical Association. A list of the plastic surgery faculty was obtained from the Web sites of the 90 plastic surgery sections identified. Four programs were excluded because they did not publicly list the academic ranking of their faculty. This information was used to create a database of all board-certified academic plastic surgeons in the United States. The academic rank of each surgeon was recorded as assistant professor, associate professor, or professor. An additional note was made if the surgeon was the chief of the division or chairperson of the department. Therefore, professorial rank and position as section head were counted as 2 separate variables. Those surgeons whose primary title was listed as adjunct faculty, clinical faculty, or research faculty were excluded from the database. Other characteristics were obtained about each institution's plastic surgery section, including region, regional subdivision, size of the faculty, model of the residency program (integrated, traditional, or both), and departmental status. Region and regional subdivision of each section were determined analogously to US Census Bureau divisions (www.census.gov). The Scopus database was then queried in October 2013 by author name to determine the h-index and the number of publications of each of the plastic surgeons who met inclusion criteria. Those surgeons with common names often had multiple authors populated upon query of the Scopus database. The previous and current affiliations of each author were cross-checked with information from the institution's Web site to verify that the publications were being attributed to the correct author. When necessary, the field of the publications in question was also verified. www.annalsplasticsurgery.com
Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
545
Annals of Plastic Surgery • Volume 76, Number 5, May 2016
Therattil et al
TABLE 1. h-Index of US Academic Plastic Surgeons by Rank, Model of Residency Program, Sex, Faculty Size, and Departmental Status h-Index Mean ± SE
Academic rank Assistant professor (n = 268) Associate professor (n = 141) Professor (n = 183) Chief (n = 60) Chairperson (n = 22) Model of residency training program Integrated (n = 459) Traditional (n = 124) Sex Male (n = 491) Female (n = 101) Size of plastic surgery faculty Fewer than 6 faculty members (n = 191) Six or more faculty members (n = 401) Status of plastic surgery section Department (n = 187) Division (n = 405)
Median
Range
P
4.59 ± 0.24 9.10 ± 0.46 15.30 ± 0.68 13.60 ± 1.34 15.41 ± 2.08
4 8 14 11 14.5
0–24 0–26 1–65 2–65 5–43
