Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Presentation3
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Presentation3

150

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
150
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  1. The H-index as a marker for productivity among academic plastic surgeons in the United States Anne Tong
  2. • Currently, there are 125 ACGME accredited plastic surgery training programs in the country. • Application for academic faculty positions remain a strongly competitive field. • Scholarly productivity is perceived as a crucial pre-requisite to compete for faculty positions. • Keeping track of productivity in research output continues to be one of the attributes of promotion within the academic faculty.
  3. • Traditionally, the determinant of academic productivitiy relies on the number of publication yield for each applicant. • This, however, does not provide a strong indication about the quality or the citation index of publications. • Recently, the Hirsch(H) index has emerged as an acceptable indicator for academic productivity.
  4. • The H-index was first developed in 2005 by Hirsch(JE Hirsch 2005). • The H-index takes 2 things into account of its calculation, that is the number of publications and number of citations of each paper . • If an author has a H-index of 20, this means that 20 of his/her publications has been cited 20 times. • If the author has 38 articles, it means the other 18 articles were cited (h) times less (in this case, less than 20 times).
  5. • In this study, the purpose is 4-fold • To determine the top 3 plastic surgery training programs that produced the highest number academic faculty members and aim to compare the average H indices of surgeons trained from respective institutions • To determine if there was a relationship between H- indices and the amount of funding received by the National Institute of Health (NIH) received per plastic surgeon. • To determine the academic institutions with the highest average of H-index.
  6. Methods • FREIDA Online® (https://freida.ama-assn.org) to identify for all ACGME-accredited plastic surgery training programs. • A total of 125 programs ( 53 integrated + x independent ) were found. • Plastic surgeons were included for this study if they (i) held full-time faculty appointment and (ii) have been board certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery(ABPS).
  7. • Information on the following profile were obtained for each academic plastic surgeon • medical school attended • training in plastic surgery • Faculty rank profile (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) • Declared subspecialty of interest (Breast, Aesthetics, Craniofacial, Transplant, Facial Reanimation, Surgical Oncology, Hand Surgery, Complex wound healing, Upper/ Lower Extremity Reconstruction).
  8. Methods • We used 2 proprietary bibliometric databases to identify for H-indices, namely SciVerse’s Scopus and Thomson Reuter’s Web of Science.
  9. Results • Of all faculty members, only 31(x%) were reported to have received NIH funding. • The average H index of NIH funded faculty members were 21.25 ±7.23 in Scopus and 21.81 ±14.57 in WoS. • Average H index of non-funded faculty members were 6.46 ± 6.04 and 6.33 ± 6.1 in Scopus and WoS respectively.
  10. H indices based on NIH funding recipients Scopus WOS Funded (n=16) 21.25 ± 7.23 21.81 ± 14.57 Not funded(n=491) 6.46 ± 6.04 6.33 ± 6.1
  11. H index in scopus based on NIH funding recipient 0 = not funded 1 = funded
  12. H index in scopus based on faculty rank FacultyRankingandH-indices Assistant professor Associate Professor Professor Scopus WOS Scopus WOS Scopus WOS Mean±Standard Deviation 4.234 ± 3.983 3.964 ± 3.62 8.943 ± 5.71 7.864 ± 5.29 12.268 ± 7.81 13.024 ± 9.38
  13. 1 = Professor 2 = Associate Professor 3=Assistant Professor
  14. NYU 1) JHU 2) UPittsburg 3) GRMEP/MSU 4) UCSF 5) UPenn 6) Foreign-traine
  15. Average H index of Plastic Surgery Training Programs Yielding Highest Number of Academic Plastic Surgeons Institution (n=number of surgeons) Scopus Web of Science NYU-Affiliated(n=28) 10.536 ± 8.63 12.071 ± 10.68 Johns Hopkins (n=24) 9.042 ± 7.27 8.083 ± 8 University of Pittsburgh(n=17) 7.142 ± 5.16 6.882 ± 5.521 GRMEP/MSU (n=14) 3.13 ± 5.18 3.73 ± 5.23 UCSF(n=14) 8.21 ± 5.88 7.57 ± 3.78 Upenn(n=14) 8.93 ± 5.76 8.43 ± 5.91 Foreign-trained (n=29) 8.793 ± 8.62 9.59 ± 11.44
  16. Average H index of Plastic Surgery Training Programs Yielding Highest Number of Academic Plastic Surgeons 1) NYU-affiliated 2) Hopkins 3) Pittsburgh 4) GRMEP/MSU 5) UCSF

×