Lower H-indices Research Articles

Exploring Diversity in North American Academic Pediatric Otolaryngology.

Representation of women and minority groups is traditionally low in Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery (OHNS). This cross-sectional study aims to assess the difference in gender and racial/ethnic representation within Academic North American pediatric OHNS. Cross-sectional study of North American pediatric OHNS faculty websites. North America. Canadian and American residency program registries were searched for accredited OHNS programs. Pediatric OHNS faculty were identified through program websites. Information regarding gender, race/ethnicity, time in practice, research productivity, academic title, and leadership positions was extracted from public profiles and Scopus. Demographic and academic data was also extracted for OHNS and pediatric OHNS department/division chairs. North American academic pediatric OHNS websites listed 516 surgeons, of whom 39.9% were women. Most surgeons were perceived as White (69.0%), followed by Asian (24.0%), Hispanic (3.7%), and Black (3.3%). Women surgeons had lower h-indices, less publications, and less citations than men (P < .001). Despite women surgeons having fewer years in practice (median 8.0 vs 13.0, P < .001), gender-differences in h-index persisted when controlling for years in practice (P < .05). Men surgeons had higher academic titles (P < .001), but there was no gender difference in leadership roles while accounting for years in practice (P = .559). White surgeons had higher academic titles than non-White surgeons (P = .018). There was no racial/ethnic difference in leadership roles (P = .392). Most pediatric OHNS surgeons are men and/or White. Significant gender-differences in research productivity and academic title exist, however surgeons of racial/ethnic minority have similar research productivity as their racial/ethnic majority counterparts.

Gender and the h-index in epidemiology

Gender-Based differences in h-indices across fields, including psychology, social work, and the biomedical sciences have been reported. These differences are persistent across all faculty ranks, including assistant, associate, and full professors, but may be larger for early career and senior faculty. Even with these known biases, the h-index remains a widely used metric of the productivity and impact of research scientists and university faculty. Recently, several studies have drawn attention to the potential for a widening gender gap in academic metrics given the ways in which gendered roles, and thus research productivity, were inequitably impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We describe the association between gender and h-index among a sample of tenured faculty from epidemiology departments in Schools and Programs of Public Health. Gender explained 1.2% of the variance in h-indices; after adjustment for professional age, gender explained only 0.1% of the variance. There was also crossover interaction for professional age and gender, with women having lower h-indices in early career yet overtaking males later. If h-indices are utilized as metrics for promotion and tenure, or as criteria for appointments to leadership or other roles, gender bias will continue to limit early- and mid-career women’s inclusion and advancement.

Sex differences in altmetric attention scores and traditional impact metrics of top-cited general surgery literature: Cracks in the ceiling?

Sex disparities have previously been identified in surgical academia. This study examines sex differences in the top-cited contemporary general surgery articles and compares Altimetric Attention Score (AAS) and other impact metrics between male and female corresponding authors (CAs). We conducted a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited articles published between 2019 and 2021 in each of the top 10 general surgery journals based on the 2021 Journal Impact Factor. Impact metrics included AAS, citation count, and H-index of the CA. We used multivariable regression analyses to investigate whether the sex of the CA or first author (FA) was independently associated with AAS and citation count. Among 1000 articles, 23.1% had female CAs and 27.4% female FAs. Female CA articles had higher AAS (13.0 [2.0-63.0] vs. 8.0 [1.0-28.5]; p<0.001) and lower H-indices (24.0 [11.0-45.0] vs. 31.0 [17.0-50.0]; p=0.015). Although median citation count did not differ by CA sex, articles with Level 1 evidence and a female CA were cited more often (35.5 [24.0-85.0] vs. 25.0 [16.0 vs. 46.0]; p<0.05). In multivariable regression, female CA articles had higher AAS (OR: 1.002 [95% CI: 1.001-1.004]) and lower H-index (OR: 0.987 [95% CI: 0.977-0.997]). Despite having similar citation counts, articles authored by female CAs exhibit higher AAS scores compared to those authored by their male counterparts. While it is heartening that research authored by female surgeons achieves significant visibility, it remains to be understood how this translates into academic impact and scholarly recognition.

Gender Disparity in Authorship Among Orthopaedic Surgery Residents.

Gender disparity remains pervasive in orthopaedic surgery, which affects the research pursuits of orthopaedic surgeons. The purpose of this study was to characterize gender-related authorship trends of orthopaedic surgery residents, including evaluation of gender-concordant publication rates. An observational cross-sectional analysis of US orthopaedic surgery residency programs was performed. Information on residency programs and demographics of each cohort was collected. Publication metrics consisting of number of first and non-first author publications and H-indices were manually obtained for PGY-3 to PGY-5 residents attending the 25 programs ranked the highest for research output by Doximity. Gender of each resident and senior author was determined from institutional websites using photos, biographies, and preferred pronouns when available. A total of 532 residents, 169 (31.8%) female and 363 (68.2%) male, were included for authorship analysis. Of them, 415 (78%) had at least one first author publication, which did not vary significantly by gender. Female residents had disproportionately fewer first author publications compared with their representation (22% vs. 31.8%, p < 0.00001). Female residents averaged fewer first and non-first author publications compared with male residents (2.8 vs. 4.6, p = 0.0003; 6.4 vs. 10, p = 0.0001 respectively). Despite fewer publications overall, a greater subset of publications by female residents were written in collaboration with a female senior author compared with publications by male residents (p < 0.0001). Male residents had a higher average H-index of 5.4 vs. 3.9 among female residents (p = 0.00007). Despite similar rates of first author publication among male and female residents, female residents had fewer publications overall, lower H-indices, and disproportionately fewer first author publications than would be expected given their representation. Findings from this study suggest that gender disparity in orthopaedic surgery extends to differences in research productivity as early as in residency. This may have negative implications on the career advancement of female orthopaedic surgeons. Additional work is needed to identify and understand biases in research productivity and career advancement, to promote more equitable strategies for academic achievement. IV.

Gender diversity in United States neurosurgery training programs.

Neurosurgery continues to be one of the medical specialties with the lowest representation of females in both the resident and faculty workforce. Currently, there are limited available data on the gender distribution of faculty and residents in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited neurosurgery training programs. This information is critical to accurately measure the results of any effort to improve both the recruitment and retention of women in neurosurgery. The objective of the current study was to define the current gender distribution of faculty and residents in ACGME-accredited neurosurgery training programs. Data publicly available through institutional and supplemental websites for neurosurgical faculty and residents at ACGME-accredited programs were analyzed for the 2017-2018 academic year. Data collected for faculty included gender, age, year of residency graduation, academic rank, h-index, American Board of Neurological Surgery certification status, and leadership positions. Resident data included gender and postgraduate year of training. Among the 109 ACGME-accredited neurosurgical residency programs included in this study, there were 1350 residents in training, of whom 18.2% were female and 81.8% were male. There are 1320 faculty, of whom 8.7% were female and 91.3% were male. Fifty-eight programs (53.2%) had both female faculty and residents, 35 programs (32.1%) had female residents and no female faculty, 4 programs (3.7%) had female faculty and no female residents, and 6 programs (5.5%) lacked both female residents and faculty. Six programs (5.5%) had incomplete data. Female faculty were younger, had lower h-indices, and were less likely to be board certified and attain positions of higher academic rank and leadership. This study serves to provide a current snapshot of gender diversity in ACGME-accredited neurosurgery training programs. While there are still fewer female neurosurgeons achieving positions of higher academic rank and serving in leadership positions than male neurosurgeons, the authors' findings suggest that this is likely due to the small number of women in the neurosurgical field who are the farthest away from residency graduation and serves to highlight the significant progress that has been made toward achieving greater gender diversity in the neurosurgical workforce.

Gender Differences in Faculty Rank, Departmental Leadership, and Research Output Amongst Hematology/Oncology Faculty in United States

Objective: Gender disparity in academic medicine remains a contentious topic of debate. Female faculty is underrepresented in leadership positions and reportedly has fewer publications, lower h-indices and grant funding. We sought to study the gender differences in faculty rank, departmental leadership and research output amongst academic hematologists/oncologists in United States.Methods: We obtained a list of clinical faculty at 146 hematology/oncology fellowship programs using Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) and program websites(February 2017). We further collected data on demographics, academic rank and research output for each faculty member on our list by searching Doximity and Scopus databases.Results: 2161 academic hematologists/oncologists were included in the final analysis. Women were particularly underrepresented at senior faculty ranks, making up one-fifth (22%; n=142) of full professors, one-third (36%; n=169) of associate professors, and half (45%, n=415) of assistant professors. 30% (n=70) of departmental leaders were women. Female faculty on average had a lower mean h-index (12.1 versus 20.9; p<0.001), but also had fewer years of professional experience.Conclusion: Gender disparity exists in senior ranks of academic hematology/oncology. This may be partly related to their lower levels of scholarly productivity, especially in early career years. Barriers to academic advancement of women in hematology/oncology need to be explored and adequately addressed. [Display omitted] DisclosuresNo relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Gender Representation in American Urological Association Guidelines

To study patterns and factors associated with female representation in the American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines. We gathered publicly available information about the panelists, including the AUA section, practice setting, academic rank, fellowship training, years in practice, and H-index. The factors associated with the proportion of female panelists and trends were investigated. We also examined the proportion of female panelists in the European Association of Urology (EAU) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) urology guidelines. There were 483 non-unique panelists in AUA guidelines, and 17% are female. Non-urologist female panelists in AUA guidelines represented a higher proportion than female urologists (30% vs 13%, P<0.0001). Compared with male panelists, females had lower H-indices (median 23 vs 35, P<0.001), and fewer were fellowship-trained (77.2% vs 86.8%; P=0.042). On multivariate analysis, non-urologists and panelists with lower H-indices were more likely to be female but there was no association between guideline specialties, academic ranking, geographic section, years in practice, and fellowship training with increased female authorship. Overtime, the proportion of female participation in guidelines remained stable. In the EAU and NCCN guideline panels, 12.2% and 10.7% were female, respectively. Female representation among major urologic guidelines members is low and unchanged overtime. Female urologist participation was proportional to their representation in the urology workforce. Being a non-urologist and lower H-indices were associated with female membership in guideline panels.

An overview of patterns and trends in nursing publications from the People's Republic of China

Abstract Objective To explore patterns and trends in nursing publications from the People's Republic of China. Methods Using the Scopus online database, the author performed two searches in August 2019. The first search identified all items in the category of nursing affiliated to China, and the second search identified publications from China within one specific nursing journal. The author used a theoretical framework to provide a more in-depth understanding of patterns and trends within these items. Results The number of articles categorized as nursing, with listed authorship in China, within the Scopus database was 17,506. The majority of published papers were categorized as research. Top-ranking Chinese universities, such as Peking University and Fudan University, scored high in terms of several publications listed within the database. Although categorized as nursing, the most common source titles that are mostly high-ranking journals did not feature the high-ranking nursing journals. Identified authors were generally not affiliated with nursing schools. Focused analysis of one of the top-ranking nursing journals, the Journal of Nursing Management, featured top Chinese universities and consistent nursing authorship. Nursing authors were found to have lower h-indices than international nursing professors. Conclusions There has been a steady increase year by year in publications categorized as nursing from China since 2009, with the majority of published papers categorized as research. There is clear evidence of scholarly activity in nursing in China, both in the published literature and anecdotally in practice. However, nursing scholars need to do more to increase dissemination and ensure that nursing professors are leading and driving nursing research, although in a multidisciplinary context. There is also a need for increased exposure of Chinese nursing scholarship in high-ranking nursing journals.

Female Representation in Otolaryngology Leadership Roles.

Characterization of leadership within otolaryngology is key to evaluating trends and promoting program advancement. This study evaluates representation of women in otolaryngology holding residency and fellowship directorships, or chair positions, comparing sex differences in academic rank, years in practice, and scholarly activity. Cross sectional analysis. A comprehensive list of otolaryngology residency and fellowship directors from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs in 2017 to 2018 was compiled. Academic rank and years in practice were determined from departmental websites, with online search tools used as secondary resources. The h-index was utilized as a measure of research productivity. Regression analysis was performed to analyze these variables. Among the 306 directorships, women held 57 (18.6%) of these positions, 27 (26.5%) residency and 30 (14.7%) fellowship directorships. Of the 99 chair positions, five (5.1%) were held by women. The majority (53.6%) of male directors were full professors, whereas only 26.3% of females were full professors (P = .04). Mean years in practice for female directors (13.9 ± 6.8) was less than that of male directors (20.3 ± 9.4, P < .0001). Similarly, mean h-index for female directors (11 ± 7.2) was lower than for males (17.5 ± 12.5, P = .0001). After controlling for academic rank and years of practice in a multivariable regression, the h-index remained lower for women than for men (P = .03). Women are disproportionately underrepresented in positions of residency and fellowship directorships, and chair positions, consistent with other specialties. Women in leadership had lower academic ranks, fewer years of practice, and lower h-indices than their male counterparts. This may represent a shift in academic otolaryngology as female otolaryngologists seek early involvement in leadership. 4 Laryngoscope, 130:1664-1669, 2020.

Gender differences in faculty rank amongst radiation oncologists in United States: A cross-sectional study.

11016Background: Female faculty in academic medicine is underrepresented in leadership positions and reportedly has fewer publications, lower h-indices and grant funding. However, there is a lack o...

The impact of biomedical students’ ethnicity and gender

PurposeThere has been a great deal of research published on the lower success rates of women and underrepresented (UR) students in Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics-related (STEM) occupations. For biomedical scientists in particular, many of the obstacles to success occur during graduate training and may be related, at least in part, to certain demographic characteristics (i.e. gender or ethnicity). In particular, women and UR students may be positioned disproportionately into labs with fewer resources and less productive faculty advisors. The paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approachThe present study examines the distribution of biomedical science graduate students into research laboratories, based on the gender and ethnicity of both students and faculty advisors. This is archival data that were collected via publicly available information on the internet.FindingsResults indicate that female (vs male) students and UR (vs white and Asian) students are paired with advisors who are less successful (i.e. fewer publications, lower h-indices). Additionally, the data show patterns of homophily in that female (vs male) and white and Asian (vs UR) students are more likely to be paired with female and white and Asian advisors, respectively.Originality/valueThis research uses real-world, archival data to demonstrate that phenomena suggested in previous literature (e.g. less favorable pairings for female and UR students, homophilic pairings) occurs with this specific population.

Neurosurgeon academic impact is associated with clinical outcomes after clipping of ruptured intracranial aneurysms.

BackgroundSurgeon-dependent factors such as experience and volume are associated with patient outcomes. However, it is unknown whether a surgeon’s research productivity could be related to outcomes. The main aim of this study is to investigate the association between the surgeon’s academic productivity and clinical outcomes following neurosurgical clipping of ruptured aneurysms.MethodsWe performed a post-hoc analysis of 3567 patients who underwent clipping of ruptured intracranial aneurysms in the randomized trials of tirilazad mesylate from 1990 to 1997. These trials included 162 centers and 156 surgeons from 21 countries. Primary and secondary outcomes were: Glasgow outcome scale score and mortality, respectively. Total publications, H-index, and graduate degrees were used as academic indicators for each surgeon. The association between outcomes and academic factors were assessed using a hierarchical logistic regression analysis, adjusting for patient covariates.ResultsAcademic profiles were available for 147 surgeons, treating a total of 3307 patients. Most surgeons were from the USA (62, 42%), Canada (18, 12%), and Germany (15, 10%). On univariate analysis, the H-index correlated with better functional outcomes and lower mortality rates. In the multivariate model, patients under the care of surgeons with higher H-indices demonstrated improved neurological outcomes (p = 0.01) compared to surgeons with lower H-indices, without any significant difference in mortality. None of the other academic indicators were significantly associated with outcomes.ConclusionAlthough prognostication following surgery for ruptured intracranial aneurysms primarily depends on clinical and radiological factors, the academic impact of the operating neurosurgeon may explain some heterogeneity in surgical outcomes.

If At First You Don't Succeed: The Fate of Manuscripts Rejected by Academic Emergency Medicine.

The purpose of this study was to characterize the publication fate of a recent 2-year sample of manuscripts declined by Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM), the journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. This was a retrospective analysis of manuscripts submitted to AEM in 2010 and 2011 that were declined by the AEM editorial review process. An online search was conducted for each declined paper, to determine whether or not it was published in another clinical/scientific journal after being declined by AEM. The investigators used Scopus and Google Scholar, using the submitting author's name, the verbatim title, and key words and phrases from the title, to search for subsequent publication of each paper. Of 1,542 manuscript submissions to the journal in 2010 and 2011, 1,052 papers were declined. Of these, 693 (65.9%) were subsequently published elsewhere, in a total of 229 journals: 362 papers in 22 different EM journals, 81 in 14 EM subspecialty journals, 237 in 185 non-EM journals, and 13 in eight nursing journals. Papers were published a median of 16.7 months (interquartile range [IQR] = 11.8 to 22.0 months) after being declined at AEM. Of the 229 journals, 19 do not have h-indices. The median h-index of the remaining 210 journals is 36 (IQR = 17 to 64; maximum = 229; AEM's h-index is 78). Thirty of these 210 journals, publishing 43 papers, have higher h-indices than AEM; the other 650 papers were published in journals either with lower h-indices than AEM's (n = 180 journals) or in journals without h-indices (n = 19 journals). U.S. and non-U.S. authors had similar rates of subsequent publication (65.3% vs 66.6%, p = 0.69) for papers initially declined by AEM. Papers in the educational advances category were less likely to be subsequently published than those in the original contributions (p < 0.0001) and brief reports (p = 0.0137) categories. Nearly two-thirds of manuscripts declined by SAEM's journal are eventually published elsewhere, in a large number and wide variety of both EM and non-EM journals, in a median of 16.7 months. Authors of manuscripts declined by AEM should consider submission elsewhere, as subsequent publication of these manuscripts in another journal is probable.