Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011 Oct;55(9):1085-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02508.x. Epub 2011 Sep 8.
H-index distinguishes differences in scholarly output across faculty ranks in anaesthesiologists, but whether h-index also identifies differences in other aspects of productivity is unknown. We tested the hypothesis that h-index is an indicator of not only publication record, but also grant funding and mentoring in highly productive US academic anaesthesiologists.
We conducted an internet analysis of the Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research Academy of Research Mentors in Anesthesiology (n = 43). Publications, citations, citations per publication, and h-index for each investigator were obtained using the Scopus(®) . Total grants, active grants, years of funding, and duration of longest funded grant were recorded using the US National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools(®) . Members were surveyed to identify the number of their career trainees and those who obtained independent funding.
The median [IRQ (Interquartile range)] h-index of members was 23 [17-32 (8-50)]. Members published 136 [100-225 (39-461)] papers with 3573 [1832-5090 (150-11,601)] citations and 21 [15-32 (4-59)] citations per publication. Members received four [3-7 (0-10)] grants and were funded for 29 [17-45 (0-115)] grant-years. Survey respondents (79%) mentored 40 [26-69 (15-191)] trainees, three [2-6 (0-20)] of which subsequently received funding. Members with h-indices greater than the median had more publications, citations, citations per publication, grants, and years of funding compared with their counterparts. H-index was associated with total citations, active grants, and the number of trainees.
In addition to publication record, h-index sensitively indicates grant funding and mentoring in highly productive US academic anaesthesiologists.
H 指数可区分麻醉医师职称之间的学术产出差异，但 H 指数是否也能反映生产力的其他方面尚不清楚。我们检验了这样一个假设，即 H 指数不仅是发表记录的指标，也是美国高产学术麻醉医师的资助和指导的指标。
我们对麻醉教育基金会和麻醉研究导师学会的研究人员（n=43）进行了互联网分析。使用 Scopus（®）获取每位研究者的出版物、引用、每篇出版物的引用数和 H 指数。使用美国国立卫生研究院研究组合在线报告工具（®）记录总资助、活跃资助、资助年限和最长资助期限。通过调查成员来确定其职业受训者和获得独立资助的人数。
成员的中位数[IRQ（四分位间距）]H 指数为 23[17-32（8-50）]。成员发表了 136[100-225（39-461）]篇论文，获得了 3573[1832-5090（150-11601）]次引用，每篇论文的引用数为 21[15-32（4-59）]。成员收到了 4[3-7（0-10）]笔赠款，资助年限为 29[17-45（0-115）]年。调查对象（79%）指导了 40[26-69（15-191）]名受训者，其中 3[2-6（0-20）]名受训者随后获得了资助。H 指数大于中位数的成员的出版物、引用、每篇论文的引用数、资助和资助年限都比其对应成员多。H 指数与总引用数、活跃资助和受训者人数相关。
除了发表记录，H 指数还能敏感地反映美国高产学术麻醉医师的资助和指导情况。
