Trends in Academic Achievement Within Otolaryngology: Does Fellowship Training Impact Research Productivity?

#OtoTwitter: The Top 75 Twitter Influencers in Otolaryngology and Association With Academic Impact

OBJECTIVES

Social media has enabled discussion of relevant topics within otolaryngology. With increasing academic discourse occurring on virtual platforms, it is important to examine who is influencing these discussions. This study thus aims to: (1) identify the top Twitter influencers in otolaryngology and (2) assess the relationship between Twitter influence and academic impact.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Twitter.

METHODS

The Right Relevance program was used to identify and rank the top 75 Twitter influencers, excluding organizations, according to the search terms "otolaryngology," "head and neck surgery," "ear nose throat," "rhinology," "head and neck," "laryngology," "facial plastics," and "otology." Demographic data and h-index were collected for each influencer. Correlational analyzes were performed to assess the relationships between Twitter rank and geographic location, sex, subspecialty, and h-index.

RESULTS

The majority of the top 75 influencers were otolaryngologists (87%), female (68%), and located in the United States (61%). General otolaryngology (n = 20, 31%) was more well-represented than any individual subspecialty including facial plastics (n = 10, 15%), rhinology (n = 10, 15%), and neurotology (n = 9, 14%). There was a significant relationship between Twitter rank and h-index (Spearman ρ value of -0.32; 95% confidence interval: -0.51 to -0.01; P = .006). Twitter rank was not significantly correlated with subspecialty, sex, or geographic location (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The majority of Twitter influencers within otolaryngology were otolaryngologists, female, and located in the United States. Social media influence is positively associated with academic impact among otolaryngologists.

Factors Associated with Research Productivity and National Institutes of Health Funding in Academic Otology

OBJECTIVES

Bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index (h-index) and the more recently developed relative citation ratio (RCR), are utilized to evaluate research productivity. Our study evaluates demographics, research productivity, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in academic otology.

METHODS

Academic otologists were identified, and their demographics were collected using institutional faculty profiles (N = 265). Funding data were obtained using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports Database. The h-index was calculated using Scopus and mean (m-RCR) and weighted RCR (w-RCR) were calculated using the NIH iCite tool.

RESULTS

H-index (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.27, p < 0.001), but not m-RCR (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97-2.31, p = 0.069) or w-RCR (aOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00, p = 0.231), was associated with receiving NIH funding. Men had greater h-index (16 vs. 9, p < 0.001) and w-RCR (51.8 vs. 23.0, p < 0.001), but not m-RCR (1.3 vs. 1.3, p = 0.269) than women. Higher academic rank was associated with greater h-index and w-RCR (p < 0.001). Among assistant professors, men had greater h-index than women (9.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.025). At career duration 11-20 years, men had greater h-index (14.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.009) and w-RCR (52.7 vs. 25.8, p = 0.022) than women.

CONCLUSION

The h-index has a strong relationship with NIH funding in academic otology. Similar h-index, m-RCR, and w-RCR between men and women across most academic ranks and career durations suggests production of similarly impactful research. The m-RCR may correct some deficiencies of time-dependent bibliometrics and its consideration in academic promotion and research funding allocation may promote representation of women in otology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 2024.

The Relative Citation Ratio: An Impartial Assessment of Productivity in Academic Otolaryngologists

OBJECTIVES

Quantification of academic productivity relies on bibliometric measurements, such as the Hirsch index (h-index). The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently developed the relative citation ratio (RCR), an article-level, citation-driven metric that compares researchers with others within their respective fields. Our study is the first to compare the usage of RCR in academic otolaryngology.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Database Review.

METHODS

Academic otolaryngology residency programs were identified using the 2022 Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. Demographic and training data were collected for surgeons using institutional websites. RCR was calculated using the NIH iCite tool, and h-index was calculated using Scopus. Mean RCR (m-RCR) is the average score of the author's articles. Weighted RCR (w-RCR) is the sum of all article scores. These derivatives are a measure of impact and output, respectively. The career duration of a physician was categorized into the following cohorts: 0-10, 11-20, 21-30, and 31+ years.

RESULTS

A total of 1949 academic otolaryngologists were identified. Men had higher h-indices and w-RCRs than women (both p less than 0.001). m-RCR was not different between genders (p = 0.083). There was a difference in h-index and w-RCR (both p less than 0.001) among the career duration cohorts, but there was no difference in m-RCR among the cohorts (p = 0.416). The faculty rank professor was the greatest for all metrics (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Critics of the h-index argue that it is reflective of the time a researcher has spent in the field, instead of impact. The RCR may reduce historic bias against women and younger otolaryngologists.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 134:592-599, 2024.

Analysis of Publication Productivity and Academic Rank of Ophthalmology Residency Program Directors in the United States

PURPOSE

Female ophthalmologists are underrepresented in the field of ophthalmology. This study aimed to analyze the gender differences among ophthalmology residency program directors (PDs) in the United States with respect to academic rank, number of publications, and h-index.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 ophthalmology residency PDs from 120 ophthalmology residency programs during the 2022 San Francisco Match. The gender information was collected from institutional websites. The information regarding the state of each institute, academic rank, degree (MD or DO), age, and publication productivity was also recorded.

RESULTS

From the 120 residency programs, 120 ophthalmology residency PDs were identified. Most PDs had an MD degree (118 out of 120, 98.3%), while only a few had a DO degree (2 out of 120, 1.7%). Only 31 (25.8%) out of 120 residency PDs were female. There was a statistically significant difference between female residency PDs and male residency PDs (p<0.0001). Male PDs had a higher h-index (15.2 ± 1.2) compared to their female counterparts (11.9 ± 0.97) (p=0.003). Regarding academic rank, male PD number was higher in each category, including assistant professor, associate professor, and full professor.

CONCLUSIONS

United States ophthalmology residency programs have a smaller portion of females compared to male PDs. Furthermore, full professors are more likely to be male, and males have higher publication productivity in terms of h-index. To promote equality among ophthalmologists, future initiatives should focus on addressing the gender disparities in ophthalmology residency programs and the selection of residency PDs.

Gender Disparities Among Academic Vitreoretinal Specialists in the United States With Regard to Scholarly Impact and Academic Rank

Background and objective While men outnumber women in the specialty of ophthalmology in general, the subspecialty of vitreoretinal surgery in particular has the highest percentage of men across all ophthalmic subspecialties. This study aimed to analyze the gender disparities regarding the publication productivity and academic rank of academic vitreoretinal specialists in the United States (US). Methods This cross-sectional study evaluated 116 ophthalmology residency programs in the US participating in the 2022 San Francisco Match. The academic vitreoretinal faculty from each ophthalmology residency program was included. The information on gender, academic rank, and publication activity in terms of the h-index were collected from institutional websites, the Scopus database, and the National Library of Medicine PubMed website. Results A total of 467 academic vitreoretinal specialists were identified. Among them, 345 (73.9%) were men, and 122 (26.1%) were women (p<0.001). When the academic ranks were analyzed, a higher number of men (43.8%) were found to hold the rank of full professor as compared to women. Furthermore, a higher number of women (47.5%) were found to hold the rank of assistant professor as compared to their male colleagues. Regarding the number of publications, in all academic rank categories, women had a significantly lower number of publications compared to men (p<0.001). Men also had a higher publication productivity or scholarly impact [h-index=15.2 ± 0.82 standard error of the mean (SEM)] compared to women (h-index=12.8 ± 0.99 SEM) (p=0.0004). Higher h-index correlated with higher academic rank, from assistant professor through full professor (p<0.001). Conclusion The field of vitreoretinal surgery has significantly fewer women compared to men, with women producing fewer publications and having less scholarly impact. H-index and total number of publications are also associated with a higher academic rank. Furthermore, full professors are more likely to be men, while assistant professors are more likely to be women. Future efforts should be aimed at reducing the gender disparity in vitreoretinal surgery.

An Otolaryngologist's Guide to Understanding the H-index and How It Could Affect Your Future Career

Objectives

The h-index is a measure of research output and contribution that shows strong correlation with academic promotion in medicine. The purpose of this article is to clearly explain how h-index scores are calculated and how otolaryngologists can effectively and advantageously use these scores for their career development.

Data Sources

PubMed.

Review Methods

We performed an up-to-date PubMed literature review describing the design of the h-index and how to use it effectively along with its role in academic medicine, including otolaryngology.

Conclusions

H-index scores are used as a metric for scientific output that considers the number of publications and the number of times each is cited. Search engines can automatically calculate h-index scores for one's work. Studies also revealed significant positive correlations that the h-index has from fellowship involvement, which could be beneficial for career advancement in academic medicine.

Implications for Practice

Aspiring academic otolaryngologists should create a research profile to link and calculate the h-index for publications, submit to well-read high-impact journals for increased viewership and citations, and expand on foundational and personal research topics. Future studies should evaluate faculty and resident awareness of h-indices in the otolaryngology department to see how we can further address any underlying barriers. Otolaryngologists with the knowledge and tools necessary to maximize h-index scores and produce high-quality research in modern-day medicine not only provide potential advantages in career development but also bring significant contribution to the field of otolaryngology and patient care.