OBJECTIVES: Clinical care parameters are frequently assessed by national ranking systems. However, these rankings do little to comment on institutions' academic contributions. The Publication Ranking Score (PRS) was developed to allow for objective comparisons of scientific thought-leadership at various pediatric urology institutions. METHODS: Faculty lists were compiled for each of the US News & World Report (USNWR) top-50 pediatric urology hospitals. A list of all faculty publications (2006-2011) was then compiled, after adjusting for journal impact factor, and summed to derive a Publication Ranking Score (PRS). PRS rankings were then compared to the USNWR pediatric urology top-50 hospital list. RESULTS: A total of 1811 publications were indexed. PRS rankings resulted in a mean change in rank of 12 positions, compared to USNWR ranks. Of the top-10 USNWR hospitals, only 4 were ranked in the top-10 by the PRS. There was little correlation between the USNWR and PRS ranks for either top-10 (r = 0.42, p = 0.23) or top-50 (r = 0.48, p = 0.0004) hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: PRS institutional ranking differs significantly from the USNWR top-50 hospital list in pediatric urology. While not a replacement, we believe the PRS to be a useful adjunct to the USNWR rankings of pediatric urology hospitals.
OBJECTIVES: Clinical care parameters are frequently assessed by national ranking systems. However, these rankings do little to comment on institutions' academic contributions. The Publication Ranking Score (PRS) was developed to allow for objective comparisons of scientific thought-leadership at various pediatric urology institutions. METHODS: Faculty lists were compiled for each of the US News & World Report (USNWR) top-50 pediatric urology hospitals. A list of all faculty publications (2006-2011) was then compiled, after adjusting for journal impact factor, and summed to derive a Publication Ranking Score (PRS). PRS rankings were then compared to the USNWR pediatric urology top-50 hospital list. RESULTS: A total of 1811 publications were indexed. PRS rankings resulted in a mean change in rank of 12 positions, compared to USNWR ranks. Of the top-10 USNWR hospitals, only 4 were ranked in the top-10 by the PRS. There was little correlation between the USNWR and PRS ranks for either top-10 (r = 0.42, p = 0.23) or top-50 (r = 0.48, p = 0.0004) hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: PRS institutional ranking differs significantly from the USNWR top-50 hospital list in pediatric urology. While not a replacement, we believe the PRS to be a useful adjunct to the USNWR rankings of pediatric urology hospitals.
Authors: Alexander Kutikov; Boris Rozenfeld; Brian L Egleston; Mohit Sirohi; Raymond W Hwang; Robert G Uzzo Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-10-25 Impact factor: 20.096