Use of the h index in neurosurgery

Clinical article

Restricted access

Object

Assessing academic productivity through simple quantification may overlook key information, and the use of statistical enumeration of academic output is growing. The h index, which incorporates both the total number of publications and the citations of those publications, has been recently proposed as an objective measure of academic productivity. The authors used several tools to calculate the h index for academic neurosurgeons to provide a basis for evaluating publishing by physicians.

Methods

The h index of randomly selected academic neurosurgeons from a sample of one-third of the academic programs in the US was calculated using data from Google Scholar and from the Scopus database. The mean h index for each academic rank was determined. The h indices were also correlated with various other factors (such as time spent practicing neurosurgery, authorship position) to identify how these factors influenced the h index. The h indices were then compared with other citation statistics to evaluate the robustness of this metric. Finally, h indices were also calculated for a sampling of physicians in other medical specialties for comparison.

Results

As expected, the h index increased with academic rank and there was a statistically significant difference between each rank. A weighting based on position of authorship did not affect h indices. The h index was positively correlated with time since American Board of Neurological Surgery certification, and it was also correlated with other citation metrics. A comparison among medical specialties supports the assertion that h index values may not be comparable between fields, even closely related specialties.

Conclusions

The h index appears to be a robust statistic for comparing academic output of neurosurgeons. Within the field of academic neurosurgery, clear differences of h indices between academic ranks exist. On average, an increase of the h index by 5 appears to correspond to the next highest academic rank, with the exception of chairperson. The h index can be used as a tool, along with other evaluations, to evaluate an individual's productivity in the academic advancement process within the field of neurosurgery but should not be used for comparisons across medical specialties.

Abbreviations used in this paper: AWCR = age-weighted citation rate; df = degrees of freedom.

Article Information

Address correspondence to: William T. Couldwell, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah, 175 North Medical Drive East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132. email: neuropub@hsc.utah.edu.

* Dr. Lee and Ms. Kraus contributed equally to this study.

© AANS, except where prohibited by US copyright law.

Headings

Figures

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph showing the mean (± SD) h indices calculated from Google Scholar for each academic rank in a group of randomly selected academic neurosurgeons.

  • View in gallery

    Graph showing the correlation between weighted and non-weighted h indices for a subset of academic neurosurgeons (r = 0.99, df = 18; p < 0.0011).

  • View in gallery

    Graph showing the correlation between the h index and g index for a subset of academic neurosurgeons (r = 0.98, df = 18; p < 0.0001).

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph showing the mean h index of sample editorial board members in various medical specialties.

References

1

Ball P: Achievement index climbs the ranks. Nature 448:7372007

2

Committee on Publication Ethics (UK): 2005 Committee on Publication Ethics Report Harlston, UKCOPE2008. (http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/reports/2005) [Accessed 7 July 2008]

3

Egghe L: Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 69:1311522006

4

Engqvist LFrommen JG: The h-index and self-citations. Trends Ecol Evol 23:2502522008

5

Falagas MEKavvadia P: “Eigenlob”: self-citation in biomedical journals”. FASEB J 20:103910422006

6

Gottfried ONRovit RLPopp AJKraus KLSimon ASCouldwell WT: Neurosurgical workforce trends in the United States. J Neurosurg 102:2022082005

7

Graf CWager EBowman AFiack SScott-Lichter DRobinson A: Best practice guidelines on publication ethics: a publisher's perspective. Int J Clin Pract Suppl 152:1262007

8

HEART Group: A statement on ethics from the HEART group. Circ Res 102:E104E1052008

9

Hirsch JE: Does the H index have predictive power?. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:19193191982007

10

Hirsch JE: An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:16569165722005

11

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors: Consensus Statement on Surgery Journal Authorship—2006: part II: scientific papers of the 117th Annual Meeting of the Southern Surgical Association. Ann Surg 243:7137142006

12

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors: Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication (http://www.icmje.org) [Accessed 7 July 2008]

13

Jeang KT: Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and Retrovirology: is it time to individualize citation metrics?. Retrovirology 4:422007

14

Jin B: The AR-index: complementing the h-index. ISSI Newsletter 3:61997

15

Kelly CDJennions MD: H-index: age and sex make it unreliable. Nature 449:4032007

16

Kelly CDJennions MD: The h index and career assessment by numbers. Trends Ecol Evol 21:1671702006

17

Kinney AL: National scientific facilities and their science impact on nonbiomedical research. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:17943179472007

18

Levy MLMarshall GD: Authors' responsibilities: guidance for submission of manuscripts to medical journals. Prim Care Respir J 16:2032042007

19

Mishra DC: Citations: rankings weigh against developing nations. Nature 451:2442008

20

Purvis A: The h index: playing the numbers game. Trends Ecol Evol 21:4222006

21

Roediger HL III: The h index in science: a new measure of scholarly contribution. Academic Observer 19:152006

22

Sykorova JTurynova M: [The science-meter indicators (citation index, impact factor, Hirsch-index) and the evaluation of the scientific activity in medicine.]. Ceska Gynekol 72:3093122007. (Czech)

23

van Haselen R: The h-index: a new way of assessing the scientific impact of individual CAM authors. Complement Ther Med 15:2252272007

24

Wendl MC: H-index: however ranked, citations need context. Nature 449:4032007

TrendMD

Metrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 60 60 53
Full Text Views 237 237 72
PDF Downloads 85 85 24
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0

PubMed

Google Scholar