Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey 07103, USA.
Laryngoscope. 2012 Dec;122(12):2690-4. doi: 10.1002/lary.23749. Epub 2012 Oct 15.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Assessment of scholarly productivity as measured by research output is a key component of decisions regarding appointment and advancement in academic otolaryngology. An increasing number of graduating residents are pursuing postresidency fellowships, and evaluation of research productivity among these subspecialists is important in determining their role in academic otolaryngology departments. The h-index is a reliable indicator of research productivity, as it takes into account both quantity and relevance of research contributions. Our objective was to evaluate and compare trends in research productivity among the various otolaryngology subspecialties.
Analysis of research productivity trends among otolaryngology subspecialties using the h-index.
Faculty members from 92 academic otolaryngology departments were organized by subspecialty and academic rank, and their research productivity, as measured by the h-index, was calculated using the Scopus database.
Fellowship-trained otolaryngologists in academic programs had higher h-indices than non-fellowship-trained otolaryngologists. Head and neck surgeons and otologists had significantly higher research productivity than their peers in other otolaryngology subspecialties. Analysis of the subspecialties of chairpersons indicated that 62% were either head and neck surgeons or otologists.
Fellowship-trained otolaryngologists had higher h-indices, and faculty members trained in the subspecialties with the highest research productivity were disproportionately represented in positions of leadership within academic otolaryngology, probably reflecting the importance of research contributions in the academic advancement process, although other factors, such as educational contributions and clinical performance, may also be important factors.
目的/假设：以研究产出衡量的学术成果评估是决定学术耳鼻喉科医生任命和晋升的关键因素之一。越来越多的住院医师在完成住院医师培训后选择从事专科医师培训，评估这些专科医生的研究成果对于确定他们在学术耳鼻喉科部门的角色非常重要。h 指数是研究成果的可靠指标，因为它同时考虑了研究贡献的数量和相关性。我们的目的是评估和比较耳鼻喉科各个亚专业的研究成果趋势。
使用 h 指数分析耳鼻喉科亚专业的研究成果趋势。
根据亚专业和学术职称组织了 92 个学术耳鼻喉科系的教员，并使用 Scopus 数据库计算了他们的 h 指数，作为研究成果的衡量标准。
在学术项目中接受过专科医师培训的耳鼻喉科医生的 h 指数高于未接受过专科医师培训的耳鼻喉科医生。头颈外科医生和耳科医生的研究成果明显高于其他耳鼻喉科亚专业的同行。对主席所在亚专业的分析表明，62%的人要么是头颈外科医生，要么是耳科医生。
接受过专科医师培训的耳鼻喉科医生 h 指数较高，在研究成果最高的亚专业中接受培训的教员在学术耳鼻喉科的领导职位中所占比例不成比例，这可能反映了研究贡献在学术晋升过程中的重要性，尽管其他因素，如教育贡献和临床表现，也可能是重要因素。
