Does Citation Analysis Reveal Association Between h-Index and Academic Rank in Urology?

Benway, Brian M.; Kalidas, Poonam; Cabello, José M.; Bhayani, Sam B.

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2008.10.045

Cited by 137 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10,11,[22][23][24][25] It has been used to predict overall influence of senior scientists and has been shown to be a strong predictor of academic rank in radiology and urology. 11,22 These same data illustrate the variability between specialties, as a full professor of urology has a mean h-index of 22, while a full professor of radiology has a corresponding h-index of only 12.5. Choi et al 10 describe a mean h-index of 8.5 for radiation oncologists, compared to mean h-index of Kulasegarah and Fenton 25 of 15 for otolaryngologists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…10 Yet in a study of urology, the mean h-index for full professors was only 10.7, with associate and assistant professors at 6.9 and 6.2, respectively. 11 It is therefore essential that the h-index distribution for any given specialty be adequately characterized so that accurate and generalizable conclusions can be drawn about an individual's place within the distribution (e.g., is this person on a par with other individuals up for promotion to associate professor in their specialty? ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Distribution of the H‐index Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States

DeLuca

John

Stolz

et al. 2013

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hirsch's h-index (h) attempts to measure the combined academic impact and productivity of a scientist by counting the number of publications by an author, ranked in descending order by number of citations, until the paper number equals the number of citations. This approach provides a natural number or index of the number of publications and the number of citations per publication. H was first described in physics and was demonstrated to be highly predictive of continued academic activity, including recognized measures of scientific excellence such as membership in the National Academy of Sciences and being a Nobel laureate. Citation rates, research environments, and years of experience all affect h, making any comparisons appropriate only for scientists working in the same field for a similar time period. The authors are unaware of any report describing the distribution of h among academic emergency physicians (AEPs).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Distribution of the H‐index Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States

DeLuca

John

Stolz

et al. 2013

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[6][7][8][9] In addition to the h-index, other bibliometrics commonly used to resolve hiring and promotion decisions include number of publications, the total number of times an author's publications have been cited by others, and grant funding history. 10 Although all of these are pertinent and easily quantifiable criteria, the h-index is arguably the only one to appraise the relevance of a faculty member's research output.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of scholarly impact among surgical specialties: An examination of 2429 academic surgeons

Svider¹,

Pashkova²,

Choudhry³

et al. 2013

The Laryngoscope

111

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis The h‐index, a bibliometric indicator that objectively characterizes the impact of an author's scholarship, is an effective tool that may be considered by academic departments for decisions related to hiring and faculty advancement. Our objective was to characterize the scholarly productivity of academic surgeons from different specialties relative to otolaryngologists. Study Design Analysis of a bibliometric database. Methods The h‐indices of 2,429 faculty members within surgical specialties at 20 randomly selected academic institutions were calculated using the Scopus database and were examined to determine relationship with academic rank and comparison among surgical subspecialties. Results The h‐index statistically increased with academic rank. Mean h‐indices were as follows: assistant professor, 4.37 (range, 2.73–6.69); associate professor, 8.70 (6.53–11.02); professor, 16.44 (13.39–20.45); and chairperson, 20.79 (14.81–27.89). Mean increase between academic rank was 5.47, with the largest increase between the levels of associate professor and professor. Further examination demonstrated statistically significant increases through all academic ranks for most, but not all, individual specialties. Urologists, general surgeons, and neurosurgeons had the highest mean h‐indices. Conclusions h‐indices among the different surgical specialties vary and are potentially impacted by the number of practitioners as well as research emphasis within a field. The mean h‐index of academic otolaryngologists falls in the lower values for academic surgeons. Because this metric varies among different fields, it is most relevant for comparison when examining values within a field. H‐indices reliably increase with increasing academic rank through professor and offer a quantifiable and objective alternative to other metrics when evaluating faculty members for academic advancement.

show abstract

“…These issues and other potential limitations of the h index have been widely reported in the literature. 3,7,9,10,[12][13][14][15]18,23,25,26,[28][29][30]35,[39][40][41] Despite these known limitations, the h index is an objective measure that takes into account the frequency with which a faculty member has had an impact upon scholarly discourse within a field and has been shown in many analyses to have a strong association with academic promotion, receiving external funding, graduate medical education, and a variety of other factors measuring achievement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing National Institutes of Health funding and scholarly impact in neurological surgery

Svider

Husain

Folbe

et al. 2014

JNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object Research productivity is increasingly important in academic neurological surgery and can be measured through a variety of methods, such as publications, objective bibliometrics, and securing external grant support. The authors' objectives were to determine whether there is an association between scholarly impact, as measured by the h index, and successful National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant funding awarded to faculty in neurological surgery departments. Methods Primary investigators receiving National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards from Fiscal Years 2011–2013 were organized by academic rank, terminal degree, and their h index, as calculated from the Scopus database. These data were also obtained for nonfunded faculty from 15 randomly selected departments for comparison, and the average h index for each group was calculated. Results National Institutes of Health–funded faculty had higher average h indices than their nonfunded colleagues (23.6 vs 10.8, p < 0.0001), a finding that persisted upon controlling for academic rank. The mean h index increased with successive academic rank in both cohorts; greater funding totals were seen with successive academic position (Kruskal-Wallis, p < 0.05). National Institutes of Health–funded MDs had higher h indices than their PhD colleagues (p = 0.04), although funding levels did not differ significantly. There was a trend of increasing h index with higher NIH-funding ranges (p < 0.05). Conclusions The authors' findings demonstrate a strong relationship between scholarly impact and securing NIH funding among faculty in academic neurosurgical departments. Faculty receiving a greater amount of funding tended to have a higher h index. Mean scholarly impact, as measured by the h index, increased with successive academic rank among both NIH-funded and nonfunded faculty, suggesting that this bibliometric may have utility as an adjunct in the academic appointment and promotion process in academic neurological surgery.

show abstract

Does Citation Analysis Reveal Association Between h-Index and Academic Rank in Urology?

Cited by 137 publications

References 10 publications

The Distribution of the H‐index Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States

The Distribution of the H‐index Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States

Comparison of scholarly impact among surgical specialties: An examination of 2429 academic surgeons

Assessing National Institutes of Health funding and scholarly impact in neurological surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About