U.S. News & World Report Research Articles

Implications for neurosurgery of medical schools leaving the United States News and World Report.

Ranked lists are a highly praised method of assessment in America. Whether it's a list of the top national sports teams, the best restaurants in New York City, or as in this case, the strongest educational institutions, we look to rankings to scrutinize, evaluate, and compare. Unfortunately, not all rankings offer insightful and valuable information. Many use metrics that fall short of an accurate representation of the desired outcome. The U.S. News & World Report (USNWR), one of the most widely regarded rankings of educational institutions, has recently been under the spotlight as several major medical schools have removed themselves from candidate lists. The current USNWR Medical School's rankings are regarded as having a narrow perspective in that the metrics perpetuate a less diverse medical community and fail to recognize worthy institutions that choose to champion a well-rounded student experience. The authors, along with the many others, fear this may deliver a skewed vision of what the USNWR tries to measure: the excellence of a medical education.

Gender Disparities in Endowed Professorships Within Orthopaedic Surgery.

Background Orthopaedic surgery has the lowest number of full-time faculty positions held by women, at 19%, with endowed chairs among the most coveted and advantageous. We examined the characteristics of endowed professors from the US top 100 orthopaedic academic centers and highest-funded musculoskeletal (MSK)researchers to determine if gender is associated with endowed professorship. Additionally, we sought to determine ifgender is associated with increased NIH funding for top-performing musculoskeletal researchers. Methods Our primary study group included the top 100 orthopaedic academic centers defined by US News World Report and Doximity's rankings. Our secondary study group examined the top MSK researchers, defined as principal investigators, who received >$400,000 in annual NIH funding from 2018 to 2021. Orthopaedic departments included MSK researchers and subspecialties within orthopaedics and medicine. Publicly available sources were used to compile institutional, gender, H-index, citation number, and subspecialty data on endowed professors; statistical comparisons were calculated. Results Within the top 100 orthopaedic academic departments, 4674 faculty were identified. Seven hundred and thirty-three (15.68%) were identified as women, 3941 as men (84.32%). One hundred and ninety-four held endowed professorships; 13 were awarded to women (6.7%), and 185 (95.3%) were awarded to men, with a significant odds ratio (OR) of 2.95, favoring men. For MSK researchers, the OR increases to 11.4. Arthroplasty and sports had the highest numbers of endowments. Significant differences in H-index, publications, and graduation year were identified between men and women for top MSK researchers and orthopaedic-trained surgeons; however, these differences disappeared when considering heterogenous orthopaedic departments that included medicine subspecialties, plastic surgery, hand surgery, and neurosurgery. Additional gender differences were observed in endowment names, with awards commemorating 51.5% men, 7.2% women, and 34% families or groups. Conclusion Gender inequities at the endowment level are substantial, and there are very few women in musculoskeletal medicine to achieve endowments. Differences in H-index, publications, and graduation year between men and women MSK researchers and orthopaedic-trained surgeons, but not combined orthopaedic, PM&R, and medical subspecialty departments, suggest unique challenges in orthopaedic surgery environments and histories that may contribute to endowment disparity. Gender was not found to be associated with funding bias for top-performing musculoskeletal researchers.

Sentiment analysis of U.S. News & World Report Best Children's Hospital urology rankings: A difference in positivity between the public and academic worlds

Initiated in 2009, the U.S. News & World Report (USNWR) pediatric urology rankings aim to guide patients and families towards high-quality urologic care. Despite this, the pediatric urology community remains divided, with significant debate over the rankings' accuracy, utility, and potential for misleading information. While some professionals argue for a collective opt-out from these rankings, citing these concerns, others highlight their positive impact on patient care, hospital benchmarking, and financial support. Recognizing the lack of formal evaluation on how these rankings are viewed beyond the pediatric urology community, this research endeavors to fill the gap through sentiment analysis of public news articles and academic publications. We captured news articles from Google News and academic papers from Ovid Medline and Embase, focusing specifically on content related to the USNWR pediatric urology rankings from 2009 to 2023. Sentiment analysis was conducted using the Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner (VADER) package on both news and academic texts, aiming to capture the overall sentiment through a compound score derived from the presence of sentiment-laden words. Sensitivity analysis was performed using TextBlob Pattern Analyzer tool. The analysis revealed a significant divergence in sentiment between news articles and academic literature. News articles exhibited a predominantly positive sentiment, with an average compound score of 0.681, suggesting a general approval or celebration of the rankings in the public sphere. Conversely, academic literature showed a more moderate sentiment, with an average score of 0.534, indicating a nuanced perspective that includes both positive views and critical reflections on the rankings. Sensitivity analysis confirmed this observation (Figure). This difference may reflect the distinct nature of news media and academic discourse. While news outlets may prioritize celebratory narratives that align with public interest and institutional pride, academic discussions tend to offer a balanced view that critically assesses both the merits and limitations of the rankings. This discrepancy underscores the complexity of interpreting and acting upon the rankings within the pediatric urology community. While the USNWR pediatric urology rankings are generally received positively by the public, as reflected in news media, the academic community presents a more reserved sentiment. These findings suggest the need for ongoing dialogue and research to understand the implications of these rankings fully. It also calls for a strategic approach to address the concerns and perceptions of healthcare professionals, aiming to leverage the rankings in a way that truly benefits patient care and informed decision-making.

Association of persistent poverty and U.S. News and World Report hospital rankings among patients undergoing major surgery

BackgroundWe sought to determine the association of persistent poverty on patient outcomes relative to US News World Report (USNWR) rankings among individuals undergoing common major surgical procedures. MethodsMedicare beneficiaries who underwent AAA repair, CABG, colectomy, or lung resection were identified. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between care at USNWR hospitals, county-level duration of poverty (never-high poverty (NHP); intermittent high poverty (IHP): persistent-poverty (PP)) and 30-day mortality. ResultsAmong 916,164 beneficiaries, individuals residing in PP neighborhoods who received surgical care at ranked hospitals had lower risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (5.89% vs 8.89%; p ​< ​0.001). On multivariable analysis, 30-day mortality was lower at ranked hospitals across all poverty categories with greatest decrease among patients from PP regions (NHP: OR-0.91, 95%CI0.87–0.95; IHP: OR-0.78, 95%CI0.69–0.88; PP: OR-0.69, 95%CI0.57–0.83; p ​< ​0.001). ConclusionReceipt of surgical care at top-ranked hospitals was associated with improvement in postoperative mortality, especially among patients residing in persistent poverty..

MP57-12 EVALUATING THE PRESENCE OF FEMALE UROLOGISTS IN TOP UROLOGY DEPARTMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP57-12 EVALUATING THE PRESENCE OF FEMALE UROLOGISTS IN TOP UROLOGY DEPARTMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES Sabika Sadiq, Laura Martin, Katherine Amin, and Raveen Syan Sabika SadiqSabika Sadiq More articles by this author , Laura MartinLaura Martin More articles by this author , Katherine AminKatherine Amin More articles by this author , and Raveen SyanRaveen Syan More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003310.12AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Women have been underrepresented in medicine, with that disparity especially evident in Urology. U.S. News World Report (USNWR) evaluates programs based on Medicare data sources and creates ranking based on patient outcomes, patient experience, nursing staff, patient volume and expert opinion. Studies suggest female Urologists are underrepresented in academic institutions, have lower publication numbers, and have slower progression from assistant professor to associate professor than male Urologists. We seek to describe the composition of female versus male attendings in the top 50 Urology departments across the United States using the 2022 USNWR ranking. METHODS: Using the 2022 USNWR top 50 institutions in Urology, we collected data using each institution’s website. We collected number of male attendings, number of female attendings, percentage of female residents in the program, presence of FPMRS fellowships and the gender of the chairperson. For institutions missing information on faculty, an asterisk was placed. Female to male urology residency ratio was calculated by female residents divided by total number of residents in the program. RESULTS: Of the top 50 Urology hospitals by 2022 USNWR ranking, 3 females are chair of their department. 26 of these institutions have a Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS) fellowship program. The top 25 institutions averaged about 32.3% female residents, similar to 31.7% female residents in institutions ranked from 26-50. The percentage of female faculty in the top 25 institutions ranged from 5-37%, with the mean of 18.7%, similar to institutions ranked 26-50 (0-38% female faculty with the average of 17.9%). Of the programs with chairwomen, female residents represented 22-45% (mean 29.7%), compared to mean 32.2% in programs with chairmen (p=0.73). Female faculty representation was similar between programs with chairwomen (range 9-29%, mean 21%) and chairmen (range 0-38%, mean 18%, p=0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing female Urology residency representation over time, women remain underrepresented in academic positions within Urology, especially among top ranked programs. Interestingly, the presence of a chairwomen did not significantly increase the proportion of female residents and faculty. Future directions include examining publication rates and professorial levels in this group. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e789 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sabika Sadiq More articles by this author Laura Martin More articles by this author Katherine Amin More articles by this author Raveen Syan More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Orthopaedic Program Reputation and Association With Social Media Utilization and Engagement.

The associations of orthopaedic social media metrics with US News & World Report (USNWR) scores have not been well defined and are the focus of this study. Orthopaedic surgery departments and residency programs were matched to the USNWR overall orthopaedic score and professional opinion subscore. Corresponding Instagram and Twitter accounts were evaluated for the number of followers, number following, and posts. Correlations between these metrics and rank/reputation were assessed. Pearson correlations and Student t tests were used with significance set at P < 0.05. Of the 192 departments associated with residency programs, there were social media accounts for 150 (78.1%) and USNWR rankings for 186 (96.9%), with an overlap of 147 (76.6%). Instagram accounts were identified for 138 (93.9%) and Twitter accounts for 85 (57.8%). Correlations were highest for the opinion subscore and number of followers (Instagram department R = 0.894, Instagram residency R = 0.338, Twitter department R = 0.808, and Twitter residency R = 0.878, P < 0.001 for each), less for the number of posts (Instagram department R = 0.590, Twitter department R = 0.521, and Twitter residency R = 0.696, P < 0.001 for each). Social media metrics correlated with USNWR scores. Focusing on such social media platforms may help further the reputation, audience engagement, and ranking of orthopaedic departments and residencies.

Comparing Consumer-Directed Hospital Rankings With STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database Outcomes

BackgroundPublic interest in stratifying hospital performance has led to the proliferation of commercial, consumer-oriented hospital rankings. In cardiac surgery, little is known about how these rankings correlate with clinical registry quality ratings. MethodsThe Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database was queried for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting or coronary artery bypass grafting/valve patients at hospitals among the top 100 U.S. News & World Report (USNWR) Cardiology & Heart Surgery rankings from 2016 to 2020. Hospitals were grouped into deciles by risk-adjusted observed/expected (O/E) ratios for morbidity and mortality using the STS 2018 risk models. Agreement between STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and USNWR ranked deciles was calculated by Bowker symmetry test. The association between each center’s annual change in STS O/E ratio and change in USNWR ranking was modeled in repeated measures regression analysis. ResultsInclusion criteria were met by 524 393 patients from 149 hospitals that ranked in USNWR top 100 at least once during the study period. There was no agreement between USNWR ranking and STS major morbidity and mortality O/E ratio (P > .50 for all years). Analysis of patients undergoing surgery at the 65 hospitals that were consistently ranked in the top 100 during the study period demonstrated no association between annual change in hospital ranking and change in O/E ratio (P all > .3). ConclusionsThere was no agreement between annual USNWR hospital ranking and corresponding risk-adjusted STS morbidity or mortality. Furthermore, annual changes in USNWR rankings could not be accounted for using clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that factors unrelated to key surgical outcomes may be driving consumer-directed rankings.

Correlation between social media utilization by academic neurosurgery departments and higher online patient ratings.

Patients increasingly utilize online physician review websites (PRWs) and social media to inform healthcare-related decisions. This provides neurosurgeons with opportunities for increased patient engagement. And despite the growing use of social media among neurosurgeons, the relationship between social media utilization and online reviews remains unknown. The goal of this study was to characterize the relationship between social media utilization and PRW ratings across academic neurosurgery departments. Social media accounts (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram) of academic neurosurgery departments were identified. Online reviews for individual faculty were obtained from Healthgrades, Vitals, WebMD, and Google. Reviews were aggregated to identify the total number of reviews per department, to generate a composite departmental rating, and to calculate a summed departmental score. US News & World Report (USNWR) and Doximity rankings were recorded for each department. Social media utilization by individual neurosurgeons and associated ratings were investigated within the departments with the highest social media utilization. Seventy-eight percent of academic neurosurgery departments utilized social media. The most prevalent platform was YouTube (49.1%), followed by Twitter (46.5%), Facebook (38.6%), and Instagram (16.7%). Higher patient ratings on PRWs were associated with the utilization of YouTube (p = 0.048) or Twitter (p = 0.02). The number of social media platforms utilized demonstrated a significant, positive correlation with patient ratings (p = 0.006) and summed patient ratings (p = 0.048). Although USNWR (p = 0.02) and Doximity (p = 0.0008) rankings correlated with patient ratings, only the number of social media platforms utilized remained a significant predictor of patient ratings on multivariate analysis (p = 0.0001). Thirty-one percent of academic neurosurgeons from departments with high social media utilization were active on social media. The most prevalent social media platform among individual neurosurgeons was Twitter (27.4%), followed by Instagram (8.4%), Facebook (4.9%), and YouTube (2.2%). Higher summed patient scores were associated with individual neurosurgeon utilization of YouTube (p = 0.04), Facebook (p < 0.0001), and Instagram (p = 0.01). Increased social media utilization among neurosurgeons was correlated with a greater number of patient reviews (p = 0.006) and higher summed patient scores (p = 0.003). On multivariate analysis, only Facebook use remained a significant predictor of the number of patient reviews received (p = 0.002) and summed patient satisfaction scores (p < 0.001). An increased social media presence is associated with higher ratings on PRWs. As neurosurgeons continue to expand their online presence, they should be aware of the possible impact of social media on online patient reviews.

Hospital Characteristics and Early Enrollment Trends in the American College of Cardiology Voluntary Public Reporting Program

Limited data exist regarding the characteristics of hospitals that do and do not participate in voluntary public reporting programs. To describe hospital characteristics and trends associated with early participation in the American College of Cardiology (ACC) voluntary reporting program for cardiac catheterization-percutaneous coronary intervention (CathPCI) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) registries. This cross-sectional study analyzed enrollment trends and characteristics of hospitals that did and did not participate in the ACC voluntary public reporting program. All hospitals reporting procedure data to the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI or ICD registries that were eligible for the public reporting program from July 2014 (ie, program launch date) to May 2017 were included. Stepwise logistic regression was used to identify hospital characteristics associated with voluntary participation. Enrollment trends were evaluated considering the date US News & World Report (USNWR) announced that it would credit participating hospitals. Data analysis was performed from March 2017 to January 2018. Hospital characteristics and participation in the public reporting program. By May 2017, 561 of 1747 eligible hospitals (32.1%) had opted to participate in the program. Enrollment increased from 240 to 376 hospitals (56.7%) 1 month after the USNWR announcement that program participation would be considered as a component of national hospital rankings. Compared with hospitals that did not enroll, program participants had increased median (IQR) procedural volumes for PCI (481 [280-764] procedures vs 332 [186-569] procedures; P < .001) and ICD (114 [56-220] procedures vs 62 [25-124] procedures; P < .001). Compared with nonparticipating hospitals, an increased mean (SD) proportion of participating hospitals adhered to composite discharge medications after PCI (0.96 [0.03] vs 0.92 [0.07]; P < .001) and ICD (0.88 [0.10] vs 0.81 [0.12]; P < .001). Hospital factors associated with enrollment included participation in 5 or more NCDR registries (odds ratio [OR],1.98; 95% CI, 1.24-3.19; P = .005), membership in a larger hospital system (ie, 3-20 hospitals vs ≤2 hospitals in the system: OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.65-3.17; P = .001), participation in an NCDR pilot public reporting program of PCI 30-day readmissions (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 2.19-3.91; P < .001), university affiliation (vs government affiliation: OR, 3.85, 95% CI, 1.03-14.29; P = .045; vs private affiliation: OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.35-3.57; P < .001), Midwest location (vs South: OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.06-2.08; P = .02), and increased comprehensive quality ranking (4 vs 1-2 performance stars in CathPCI: OR, 8.08; 95% CI, 5.07-12.87; P < .001; 4 vs 1 performance star in ICD: OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.48-3.44; P < .001) (C statistic = 0.829). This study found that one-third of eligible hospitals participated in the ACC voluntary public reporting program and that enrollment increased after the announcement that program participation would be considered by USNWR for hospital rankings. Several hospital characteristics, experience with public reporting, and quality of care were associated with increased odds of participation.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications of Pharmacy Practice Department Chairs

Objective. To perform a bibliometric analysis of pharmacy practice department chairs at US schools and colleges of pharmacy to determine factors associated with their level of scholarly productivity.Methods. Scopus was searched for all publications by pharmacy practice chairs from all pharmacy schools through August 11, 2020. Publication metrics (total number of publications and citations and the Hirsch-index (h-index), and year of first publication), as well as characteristics of the individual chair and institution were collected. Characteristics were compared across groups. A generalized linear model was used to determine the correlation between the total number of publications and h-index to school ranking by US News & World Report (USNWR).Results. One hundred forty-one pharmacy practice chairs were identified. The majority were male and at the rank of professor, with a similar proportion from public and private institutions. The median total number of publications and citations was 19 and 247, respectively, with a median h-index of eight. Compared with female chairs, male chairs had a higher median total of publications and citations and a higher h-index. Chairs at public institutions had a higher median total of publications and citations and a higher publication rate, h-index, and m quotient. The USNWR ranking for the school was significantly correlated with total publications and the h-index.Conclusion. Pharmacy practice chairs vary significantly in their scholarship productivity, although those at institutions with a larger emphasis on research were more prolific. Observed differences in the publication metrics of male and female chairs warrants further study to determine possible explanations for this finding and its potential impact.

Institutional and programmatic determinants for graduate public affairs’ online education: Assessing the influence of faculty workload

The research explores why some public affairs graduate programs choose to develop fully online degree offerings while others do not. The study attempts to address questions surrounding how different institutions and programs are pursuing degree offerings and the potential influence of faculty workload. The research utilizes a quantitative, cross-sectional design analyzing results from a survey on institutional and programmatic practices in workload, hiring, and degree offerings administered to primary points of contact within public affairs academic units from all institutions found in the US News World Report Graduate Programs in Public Affairs Rankings from 2019. Survey data is paired with program information from the accrediting body institutional member database. Findings indicate differences from both institutional and programmatic groupings do demonstrate workload measures have unique characteristics depending upon the type of institution and rank of the program. Further analysis discusses the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on future public affairs programming.

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) at United States News and World Report top-ranked hospitals in orthopedics – do rankings correlate with complications and cost?

IntroductionThe U.S. News & World Report (USNWR) hospital rankings remain the most publicly referenced system for identifying top hospitals for each specialty. The current study aims to evaluate whether there are any differences in outcomes and costs for patients undergoing anatomic TSA (ATSA) or reverse TSA (RTSA) for degenerative pathologies at ranked vs. non–ranked hospitals. MethodsThe 2011-2014 USNWR hospital rankings were used to identify ranked hospitals in “Orthopedics.” The 2011-2014 100% Medicare Standard Analytical Files (SAF100) were used to identify patients undergoing ATSA or RTSA for degenerative arthritis. The study cohort was divided into two groups, based on whether patients received surgery at a ranked hospital vs. a non–ranked hospital. Multi-variate logistic and linear regression analyses were used to assess for differences in 90-day outcomes and costs between ranked and non–ranked hospitals, while controlling for potential co-variates/confounders. ResultsA total of 82,417 TSA were included in the study – out of which 8,868 (10.8%) were performed in one of the 68 hospitals that were ranked by the USNWR between 2011 and 2014. Following adjustment for baseline demographics, and clinical characteristics, there were no statistically significant differences between ranked vs. non–ranked hospitals, with regards to rates of infectious complications (0.8% vs. 1.0%, OR 0.91 [95% CI 0.82-1.01]; P = .079), dislocations (0.8% vs. 0.9%, OR 1.07 [95% CI 0.79-1.43]; P = .658), peri-prosthetic fractures (0.3% vs. 0.3%, OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.47-1.21]; P = .269), pulmonary embolism (0.7% vs. 0.8%, OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.64-1.20]; P = .435), deep venous thrombosis (1.1% vs. 0.9%, OR 1.21 [95% CI 0.93-1.56]; P = .153), myocardial infarction (0.4% vs. 0.5%, OR 1.00 [95% CI 0.67-1.46]; P = .995), sepsis (6.0% vs. 7.3%, OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.85-1.05]; P = .314), urinary tract infections (4.8% vs. 5.6%, OR 0.99 [95% CI 0.87-1.11]; P = .831) and readmissions (7.1% vs. 8.3%, OR 0.91 [95% CI 0.82-1.01]; P = .079). Ranked hospitals, however, did have higher risk-adjusted charges (+ $6,167; P < .001), and costs (+ $1.831; P < .001) across the entire episode of care. ConclusionBased on our findings, patients undergoing TSA at ranked hospitals vs. non–ranked hospitals have similar outcomes, despite the former facilities having higher costs and charges across the episode of care. Level of EvidenceLevel III

Outcomes of Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Resection at US News & World Report Top-Ranked vs Non-Ranked Hospitals

The US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgery offers direction to patients and healthcare providers, especially for recommendations on complex medical and surgical gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. The objective of this study was to examine the outcomes of complex GI cancer resections performed at USNWR top-ranked, compared to non-ranked, hospitals. Using the Vizient database, data for patients who underwent esophagectomy, gastrectomy, and pancreatectomy for malignancy between January and December 2018 were reviewed. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed according to USNWR rank status. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, mortality index (observed-to-expected mortality ratio), rate of serious complication, and cost. Secondary analysis was performed for outcomes of patients who developed serious complications. There were 3,054 complex GI cancer resections performed at 42 top-ranked hospitals vs 3,608 resections performed at 198 non-ranked hospitals. The mean annual case volume was 73 cases at top-ranked hospitals compared to 18 cases at non-ranked hospitals. Compared with non-ranked hospitals, top-ranked hospitals had lower in-hospital mortality (0.96% vs 2.26%, respectively, p< 0.001) and lower mortality index (0.71 vs 1.53, respectively). There were no significant differences in length of stay, rate of serious complications, or direct cost between groups. In patients who developed serious morbidity, top-ranked hospitals had a lower mortality compared with non-ranked hospitals (8.2% vs 16.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). Within the context of complex GI cancer resection, USNWR top-ranked hospitals performed a 4-fold higher case volume and were associated with improved outcomes. Patients with complex GI-related malignancies may benefit from seeking surgical care at high-volume regional USNWR top-ranked hospitals.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program Social Media Presence During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background:In light of away rotation and in-person interview cancellations for the 2020 to 2021 application cycle, social media has become a popular tool for orthopaedic surgery residency programs to highlight their strengths, curricula, and social life to prospective applicants. The authors sought to explore the proliferation and utilization of 3 popular social media platforms by both orthopaedic surgery departments and residencies.Methods:Orthopaedic surgery departmental and residency program social media accounts and their creation dates across Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were identified using a standardized search methodology. Residency Instagram accounts were further evaluated for the number of posts, followers, likes, and comments. Both departments and residency programs were cohorted by affiliation with a US News &World Report (USNWR) top 50 American hospital for orthopaedics or by status as a Doximity top 20 program based on reputation.Results:Across a total of 192 residency programs included for analysis, Instagram was the most popular social media platform (61.5%), followed by Twitter (19.8%) and Facebook (10.4%). Conversely, orthopaedic departments more frequently used Facebook (33.9%) and Twitter (28.1%) over Instagram (17.2%). Of the 118 residency Instagram accounts, 102 (86.4%) were created after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Larger residency programs (≥6 spots/year) and those programs in the Doximity top 20 or affiliated with USNWR top 50 orthopaedic hospitals had a greater number of followers as well as likes and comments per post (p < 0.05 for all).Conclusions:Given the recruitment challenges faced by residency programs because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Instagram has rapidly become a prominent platform for attracting orthopaedic surgery applicants. These accounts have a large number of followers, particularly for residency programs with higher Doximity reputation rankings.

Center Reputation and Experience Relate to Industry Payments to Congenital Heart Disease Providers

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act was enacted to understand financial relationships with industry that might influence provider decisions. We investigated how industry payments within the congenital heart community relate to experience and reputation. Congenital cardiothoracic surgeons and pediatriccardiologists were identified from the Open Payments Database. All payments from 2013 through 2017 were matched to affiliated hospitals' U.S. News & World Report (USNWR) rankings, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons-Congenital Heart Surgery Public Reporting Star Ratings, and Optum Center of Excellence (COE) designation. Surgeon payments were linked to years since terminal training. Univariable analyses were conducted. The median payment amount per surgeon ($71; interquartile range [IQR], $41-$99) was nearly double the median payment amount per cardiologist ($41; IQR, $18-$84; P < .05). For surgeons, median individual payment was 56% higher to payees at USNWR top 10 children's hospitals ($100; IQR, $28-$203) vs all others ($64; IQR, $23-$140; P < .001). For cardiologists, median individual payment was 26% higher to payees at USNWR top 10 children's hospitals ($73; IQR, $28-$197) vs all others($58; IQR, $19-$140; P < .001). Findings were similar across The Society of Thoracic Surgeons-Congenital Heart Surgerystar rankings and Optum Center of Excellence groups. By surgeon experience, surgeons 0 to 6 years posttraining (first quartile) received the highest number of median payments per surgeon (17 payments; IQR, 6.5-28 payments; P < .001). Surgeons 21 to 44 years posttraining (fourth quartile) received the lowest median individual payment ($51; IQR, $20-132; P< .001). Industry payments vary by hospital reputation and provider experience. Such biases must be understood for self-governance and the delineation of conflict of interest policies that balance industry relationships with clinical innovation.

Predicting the 2016 US News & World Report rankings using a reputation and prestige model

IntroductionThe objective was to determine institutional, faculty, and student attributes predictive of the 2016 US News & World Report (USNWR) pharmacy rankings and to explore if student attributes modify program rankings. MethodsInstitutional attributes and student and faculty resources and outcomes were obtained from various sources. Regression analyses predicted rankings. ResultsUSNWR rankings were higher for older programs, those located at an academic health center or classified as a research-intensive institution, and members of a Power Five athletic conference. Number of fulltime equivalent faculty, Pharmacy College Admissions Test composite percentile, pharmacy practice h-index score, funding rank, and first time North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) pass rate predicted higher rankings. Nearly 45% of programs in the empiric models left or entered the top 25 rankings compared with the existing USNWR method (range 31 place increase to 22 place decrease). Among USNWR top 25 ranked programs, 16 remained in the top 25 in all four empiric models and three were not included in any of the models. Six USNWF unranked programs moved into the top 25 by one or more of the empiric models. ConclusionsFaculty and student attributes significantly impact program rankings, while impact of institutional attributes is negligible if independent of student and faculty attributes. Faculty numbers and productivity influence USNWR rankings more than student academic preparation and success on NAPLEX. These findings will inform efforts to improve the validity of the USNWR rankings and identify programs that are both prestigious and of high quality.

Elucidation of a resource reputation model to explain US News & World Report ranking using path analysis

IntroductionThe US News & World Report (USNWR) ranking is based on a reputation and prestige survey mailed to academic peers. This study's goal was to determine direct and indirect institutional, faculty, and student attributes predictive of the 2016 USNWR pharmacy rankings. MethodsThe Resource and Reputation Model (RRM) explains the development of perceptions of reputation and prestige. Institutional characteristics as well as student and faculty resources and outcomes were obtained from various sources. Path analysis determined the total, direct, and indirect effects. ResultsUSNWR rankings were higher if programs were older, affiliated with an academic health center, classified as a research-intensive institution, and members of a Power 5 football conference. Program rank was predicted by the number of full-time faculty equivalents and pharmacy practice h-index score and funding. Pharmacy College Admissions Test comprehensive percentile and first-time North American Pharmacy Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) pass rate were also predictive of higher rank. All but affiliation with an academic health center or research-intensive institution directly predicted rank, but they had indirect impact through programmatic quality attributes. ConclusionsThe RRM helps to explain pharmacy programs' USNWR rankings. Elucidation of its components provide insight into explaining the rankings and improving the methodology. Academic pharmacy could work with USNWR to develop criteria-based objective methodology to validate and improve rankings. Faculty, faculty productivity, and student academic preparation and success on NAPLEX influence USNWR rankings more than immutable factors such as program age and affiliations.

An Analysis of the US News & World Report Methodology for Attribution of Specialty Care in Otolaryngology and Urology.

US News & World Report (USNWR) rankings can assist patients with choosing where to receive their specialty care. USNWR methodology assumes that the specialty caring for hospitalized patients is equivalent to the specialty assigned by administrative coding. We examined the frequency of discordance between USNWR methodology-assigned specialty and the actual specialty care received for 2 surgical specialties, otolaryngology (ENT) and urology (GU). Our analysis included inpatient deaths identified by USNWR coding for these specialties from 2013 to 2017 at a single academic tertiary care center. We found that a minority of patients with deaths attributed by USNWR to these 2 specialties were actually cared for by ENT (6/14; 43%) or GU (3/19; 16%). Only 5 of 14 (36%) and 2 of 19 (11%) deaths were potentially associated with ENT and GU care, respectively. We identified a significant discordance between USNWR-assigned specialty and the actual specialty care received.

Availability of Fertility Preservation Information on the Websites of U.S. News and World Report Top-Ranked Pediatric Cancer Programs.

Purpose: To evaluate the availability of fertility preservation (FP) services and educational resources on the websites of top-ranked U.S. pediatric cancer programs. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of information and resources related to FP on websites from top-ranked pediatric cancer programs according to the 2018-2019 U.S.-News & World Report (USNWR) ranking. Factors that predicted the website availability of FP information or a fertility team were analyzed, as was availability in Spanish and for specific groups by sex and puberty status. As a surrogate marker of comprehensive oncological services, the availability of resources for psychological support was compared to FP. Results: A fertility team was referenced on the website of 36% of programs, but only 32% provided FP educational resources for patients. Among them, 100%, 93.8%, 93.8%, and 68.8% provided specific information for postpubertal females, prepubertal females, postpubertal males, and prepubertal males, respectively. The majority (93.8%) did not provide information in Spanish. The ranking on USNWR (p < 0.05) and patient volume (p < 0.05) positively correlated with the availability of FP information and fertility team on the program's website. Information regarding psychological support was provided more often than information regarding FP (96% vs. 32%, p < 0.05). Conclusion: The majority of the top-ranked pediatric cancer programs in the United States do not list FP resources or a fertility team on their website. The lack of resources is particularly concerning for the Spanish-speaking population, as well as for prepubertal males. This may be potentially hindering access to FP and contributing to health care disparities.

Comparing textbook outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for cancer at U. S. News & World Report ranked hospitals.

BackgroundThe objective of the current study was to define and compare rates of textbook outcomes (TO) among patients undergoing colorectal, lung, esophagus, liver, and pancreatic surgery for cancer at U.S. News & World Report (USNWR) ranked hospitals.MethodsMedicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files 2013‐2015 were utilized to examine the relationship of TO and USNWR hospital ratings following surgery for colorectal, lung, esophageal, pancreatic, and liver cancer. TO was defined as no postoperative surgical complications, no prolonged length of hospital stay, no readmission within 90 days after discharge, and no postoperative mortality within 90 days after surgery.ResultsAmong the 35,352 Medicare patients included in the cohort, 16,820 (47.6%) underwent surgery at honor roll hospitals, whereas 18 532 (52.4%) underwent surgery at non‐honor roll hospitals. The overall proportion of patients who achieved TO was 50.1%. In examining the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent surgery, there was no difference in the odds of achieving TO at honor roll vs non‐honor roll hospitals (colorectal: odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69‐1.10; lung: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.87‐1.32; esophagus: OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.72‐2.89; liver: OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.87‐1.84; pancreas: OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.67‐1.62).Conclusion and RelevancePatients undergoing surgery for lung, esophageal, liver, pancreatic, and colorectal cancer had comparable rates of TO at honor roll vs non‐honor roll hospitals. No linear association was observed between hospital position in the rank and postoperative outcomes such as TO indicating that patients should not overly focus on the exact position within USNWR ranked hospitals. These data highlight to patients and physicians that up to one‐half of patients undergoing surgery for cancer should anticipate at least one adverse outcome.