Peter F Svider1, Santiago A Lopez2, Qasim Husain2, Neelakshi Bhagat3, Jean Anderson Eloy4, Paul D Langer3. 1. Institute of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. 3. Institute of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. 4. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey; Department of Neurological Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey; Center for Skull Base and Pituitary Surgery, Neurological Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. Electronic address: jean.anderson.eloy@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether there is an association between scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, academic rank, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards in academic ophthalmology. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of NIH RePORTER and Scopus databases. PARTICIPANTS: Not applicable. METHODS: Five hundred seventy-three NIH awards to 391 primary investigators (PIs) in ophthalmology departments were examined. Grant recipients were organized by academic rank, obtained from online listings, and h-index, calculated using the Scopus database. Non-NIH-funded faculty from 20 randomly chosen academic ophthalmology departments also were organized by rank and h-index for comparison with their NIH-funded colleagues. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, and NIH funding. RESULTS: The h-index increased with successive academic rank among non-NIH-funded and NIH-funded faculty, as did NIH funding among the latter group. The NIH-funded faculty had higher scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, than their non-NIH-funded PIs (h = 18.3 vs. 7.8; P <0.0001), even when considering publications only in the prior 5 years; h-index increased with increasing NIH funding ranges. The h-indices of those holding an MD degree (21.4±1.6 standard error of mean) were not statistically higher than those of PhD holders (17.9±0.6) and those with both an MD and PhD degree (18.1±1.7; P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The h-index increases with increasing academic rank among NIH-funded and non-NIH-funded faculty in ophthalmology departments. This bibliometric is associated strongly with NIH funding because NIH-funded PIs had higher scholarly impact than their non-NIH-funded colleagues, and increasing impact was noted with higher funding. The h-index is an objective and easily calculable measure that may be valuable as an adjunct in assessing research productivity, a significant factor for academic promotion in academic ophthalmology.
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether there is an association between scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, academic rank, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards in academic ophthalmology. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of NIH RePORTER and Scopus databases. PARTICIPANTS: Not applicable. METHODS: Five hundred seventy-three NIH awards to 391 primary investigators (PIs) in ophthalmology departments were examined. Grant recipients were organized by academic rank, obtained from online listings, and h-index, calculated using the Scopus database. Non-NIH-funded faculty from 20 randomly chosen academic ophthalmology departments also were organized by rank and h-index for comparison with their NIH-funded colleagues. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, and NIH funding. RESULTS: The h-index increased with successive academic rank among non-NIH-funded and NIH-funded faculty, as did NIH funding among the latter group. The NIH-funded faculty had higher scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, than their non-NIH-funded PIs (h = 18.3 vs. 7.8; P <0.0001), even when considering publications only in the prior 5 years; h-index increased with increasing NIH funding ranges. The h-indices of those holding an MD degree (21.4±1.6 standard error of mean) were not statistically higher than those of PhD holders (17.9±0.6) and those with both an MD and PhD degree (18.1±1.7; P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The h-index increases with increasing academic rank among NIH-funded and non-NIH-funded faculty in ophthalmology departments. This bibliometric is associated strongly with NIH funding because NIH-funded PIs had higher scholarly impact than their non-NIH-funded colleagues, and increasing impact was noted with higher funding. The h-index is an objective and easily calculable measure that may be valuable as an adjunct in assessing research productivity, a significant factor for academic promotion in academic ophthalmology.
Authors: Wyatt P Bensken; Alexandra K Hansen; Gina Norato; John D Heiss; Avindra Nath; Omar I Khan Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alex T Pham; Todd D Whitescarver; Bradley Beatson; Boonkit Purt; Yoshihiro Yonekawa; Ankoor S Shah; Marcus H Colyer; Fasika A Woreta; Grant A Justin Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Nakul P Valsangkar; Teresa A Zimmers; Bradford J Kim; Casi Blanton; Mugdha M Joshi; Teresa M Bell; Attila Nakeeb; Gary L Dunnington; Leonidas G Koniaris Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Scott J Schwartz; Peter F Svider; Priyanka Shah; Giancarlo Zuliani; Jean Anderson Eloy; Michael Setzen; Adam J Folbe Journal: Am J Otolaryngol Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 1.808
Authors: Rishi Trikha; Thomas E Olson; Ameen Chaudry; Chad R Ishmael; Cristina Villalpando; Clark J Chen; Kellyn R Hori; Nicholas M Bernthal Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2022-02-18