OBJECT: The h index is a recently developed bibliometric that assesses an investigator's scientific impact with a single number. It has rapidly gained popularity in the physical and, more recently, medical sciences. METHODS: The h index for all 1120 academic neurosurgeons working at all Electronic Residency Application Service-listed training programs was determined by reference to Google Scholar. A random subset of 100 individuals was investigated in PubMed to determine the total number of publications produced. RESULTS: The median h index was 9 (range 0-68), with the 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles being 17, 26, and 36, respectively. The h indices increased significantly with increasing academic rank, with the median for instructors, assistant professors, associate professors, and professors being 2, 5, 10, and 19, respectively (p < 0.0001, Kruskal-Wallis; all groups significantly different from each other except the difference between instructor and assistant professor [Conover]). Departmental chairs had a median h index of 22 (range 3-55) and program directors a median of 17 (range 0-62). Plot of the log of the rank versus h index demonstrated a remarkable linear pattern (R(2) = 0.995, p < 0.0001), suggesting that this is a power-law relationship. CONCLUSIONS: A survey of the h index for all of academic neurosurgery is presented. Results can be used for benchmark purposes. The distribution of the h index within an academic population is described for the first time and appears related to the ubiquitous power-law distribution.
OBJECT: The h index is a recently developed bibliometric that assesses an investigator's scientific impact with a single number. It has rapidly gained popularity in the physical and, more recently, medical sciences. METHODS: The h index for all 1120 academic neurosurgeons working at all Electronic Residency Application Service-listed training programs was determined by reference to Google Scholar. A random subset of 100 individuals was investigated in PubMed to determine the total number of publications produced. RESULTS: The median h index was 9 (range 0-68), with the 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles being 17, 26, and 36, respectively. The h indices increased significantly with increasing academic rank, with the median for instructors, assistant professors, associate professors, and professors being 2, 5, 10, and 19, respectively (p < 0.0001, Kruskal-Wallis; all groups significantly different from each other except the difference between instructor and assistant professor [Conover]). Departmental chairs had a median h index of 22 (range 3-55) and program directors a median of 17 (range 0-62). Plot of the log of the rank versus h index demonstrated a remarkable linear pattern (R(2) = 0.995, p < 0.0001), suggesting that this is a power-law relationship. CONCLUSIONS: A survey of the h index for all of academic neurosurgery is presented. Results can be used for benchmark purposes. The distribution of the h index within an academic population is described for the first time and appears related to the ubiquitous power-law distribution.
Authors: Vanash M Patel; Hutan Ashrafian; Lutz Bornmann; Rüdiger Mutz; Jonathan Makanjuola; Petros Skapinakis; Ara Darzi; Thanos Athanasiou Journal: J R Soc Med Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Garrett T Venable; Brandon A Shepherd; Mallory L Roberts; Douglas R Taylor; Nickalus R Khan; Paul Klimo Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Shushan Rana; Emma B Holliday; Reshma Jagsi; Lynn D Wilson; Mehee Choi; Charles R Thomas; Clifton D Fuller Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Burhan Hassan; Elmer Bernstam; O Joe Hines; Diane M Simeone; Sharon M Weber; David A Geller; B Mark Evers; Funda Meric-Bernstam Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 2.192