Abstract
ContextPrior research has faulted the US News and World Report hospital specialty rankings for excessive reliance on reputation, a subjective measure of a hospital's performance.ObjectiveTo determine whether and to what extent reputation correlates with objective measures of research productivity among cancer hospitals.DesignA retrospective observational study.SettingAutomated search of NIH Reporter, BioEntrez, BioMedline and Clinicaltrials.gov databases.ParticipantsThe 50 highest ranked cancer hospitals in 2013's US News and World Report Rankings.ExposureWe ascertained the number of NCI funded grants, and the cumulative funds received by each cancer center. Additionally, we identified the number of phase I, phase II, and phase III studies published and indexed in MEDLINE, and registered at clinicaltrials.gov. All counts were over the preceding 5 years. For published articles, we summed the impact factor of the journals in which they appeared. Trials were attributed to centers on the basis of the affiliation of the lead author or study principal investigator.Main OutcomeCorrelation coefficients from simple and multiple linear regressions for measures of research productivity and a center's reputation.ResultsAll measures of research productivity demonstrated robust correlation with reputation (mean r-squared = 0.65, median r-squared = 0.68, minimum r-squared = .41, maximum r-squared = 0.80). A multivariable model showed that 93% of the variation in reputation is explained by objective measures.ConclusionContrary to prior criticism, the majority of reputation, used in US News and World Rankings, can be explained by objective measures of research productivity among cancer hospitals.
Highlights
Background and SignificanceEach year, the US News and World Report (US N&WR) ranks the 50 highest scoring US cancer centers as a part of its annual hospital specialty rankings
A multivariable model showed that 93% of the variation in reputation is explained by objective measures
In addition to the 6 variables used to derive each center’s final score, we assembled data on the number of, and total payments for National Cancer Institute (NCI) funded grants, the number of phase I, II and III publications, the cumulative impact factor of the journals in which those publications appeared, and the number of clinical trials listed by center and phase in clinicaltrials.gov, all over the last 5 years
Summary
The US News and World Report (US N&WR) ranks the 50 highest scoring US cancer centers as a part of its annual hospital specialty rankings. These rankings generate attention and criticism from the public, policy researchers, and physicians [1,2,3]. Prior research has found that the reputation score alone, based on a survey of specialists, most strongly correlated with the overall score for both adult [4] and pediatric [5] rankings. Among adult specialties, ranking on reputation alone agreed with final rankings 100% of the time [4]. Because reputation is ascertained via an opinion poll [7], the US N&WR rankings have been criticized for failing to provide an objective measure. [4]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
