Predicting Academic Career Placement: Neurosurgery's Quest for the Holy Grail

An Analysis of Publication Productivity During Residency for 1506 Neurosurgical Residents and 117 Residency Departments in North America

BACKGROUND

Bibliometrics is defined as the study of statistical and mathematical methods used to quantitatively analyze scientific literature. The application of bibliometrics in neurosurgery continues to evolve.

OBJECTIVE

To calculate a number of publication productivity measures for almost all neurosurgical residents and departments within North America. These measures were correlated with survey results on the educational environment within residency programs.

METHODS

During May to June 2017, data were collected from departmental websites and Scopus to compose a bibliometric database of neurosurgical residents and residency programs. Data related to authorship value and study content were collected on all articles published by residents. A survey of residency program research and educational environment was administered to program directors and coordinators; results were compared with resident academic productivity.

RESULTS

The median number of publications in residency was 3; median h-index and Resident index were 1 and 0.17 during residency, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in academic productivity among male neurosurgical residents compared with females. The majority of articles published were tier 1 clinical articles. Residency program research support was significantly associated with increased resident productivity (P < .001). Scholarly activity requirements were not associated with increased resident academic productivity.

CONCLUSION

This study represents the most comprehensive bibliometric assessment of neurosurgical resident academic productivity during training to date. New benchmarks for individual and department academic productivity are provided. A supportive research environment for neurosurgical residents is associated with increased academic productivity, but a scholarly activity requirement was, surprisingly, not shown to have a positive effect.

A Survey of Neurological Surgery Residency Program Mentorship Practices Compared to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Resident Outcome Data

Mentorship can be a powerful and life-altering experience during residency training, but there are few articles discussing mentorship models within neurosurgery. In this study, we surveyed US neurosurgical department mentorship practices and linked them to resident outcomes from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), including resident survey responses, board pass rates, and scholarly activity.

A 19-question survey was conducted from October to December 2017 with the assistance of the Society of Neurological Surgeons. De-identified data were then obtained from the ACGME and correlated to these results. Out of 110 programs, 80 (73%) responded to the survey and gave informed consent. The majority (65%) had a formal mentorship program and assigned mentor relationships based on subspecialty or research interest. Barriers to mentorship were identified as time and faculty/resident “buy-in.” Mentorship programs established for 5 or more years had superior resident ACGME outcomes, such as board pass rates, survey results, and scholarly activity. There was not a significant difference in ACGME outcomes among programs with formal or informal/no mentorship model (P = .17). Programs that self-identified as having an “unsuccessful” mentorship program had significant increases in overall negative resident evaluations (P = .02).

Programs with well-established mentorship programs were found to have superior ACGME resident survey results, board pass rates, and more scholarly activity. There was not a significant difference among outcomes and the different models of formal mentorship practices. Barriers to mentorship, such as time and faculty/resident “buy-in,” are identified.