The effect of academic rank and years in practice on bibliometric profile growth rates among academic neurosurgeons in the New York metropolitan area

Abstract

BackgroundAuthor-level metrics for assessing academic productivity have a significant impact on career advancement in academia. This study determined if 1-year growth rates in author-level metrics among New York (NY) metropolitan area academic neurosurgeons were associated with academic rank and/or years in practice since graduating residency. MethodsH-index, document number, and citation number were recorded monthly from March 2018 to March 2019 for academic neurosurgeons from eight NY metropolitan area training programs using the Scopus® abstract and citation database. Subjects with a decrease in any metric or an increase of ≥10 for h-index, ≥20 for documents, or ≥150 for citations between time points were excluded from the analysis. Differences in 1-year metric increases between academic ranks (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) were evaluated using ANOVA with Games-Howell post-hoc test. Differences in 1-year metric increases between Assistant Professors with ≤10 and >10 years in practice were evaluated using two-tailed independent samples t-test. ResultsThe final analysis included 80 subjects. Citation growth rates were significantly different between the academic ranks (F2,77 = 13.09, p < 0.0001); Assistant Professors and Associate Professors had a significantly higher 1-year increase in citations compared to Professors (p < 0.001 and p = 0.025 respectively). Assistant Professors with ≤10 years in practice had significantly higher 1-year increases in h-index (p = 0.001) and documents (p = 0.016) than those with >10 years in practice. ConclusionEarly-career Assistant Professors in academic neurosurgery may exhibit higher productivity than senior faculty, but this finding is qualified by the presence of significant inaccuracies in Scopus® bibliometric profiles.