Kasabwala Khushabu, Morton Christopher M, Svider Peter F, Nahass Thomas A, Eloy Jean Anderson, Jackson-Rosario Imani
Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey.
Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey.
J Surg Educ. 2014 May-Jun;71(3):345-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.10.010. Epub 2013 Dec 30.
Residents seek postresidency fellowship training to increase competency with novel surgical techniques and augment their fund of knowledge. Research productivity is a vital component of advancement in academic urology. Our objectives were to use the h-index (an objective and readily available bibliometric that has been repeatedly shown to correlate with scholarly impact, funding procurement, and academic promotion in urology as well as other specialties) to determine whether any relationship exists between fellowship training and scholarly impact among academic urologists. Additional examination was performed to determine whether any differences in scholarly influence are present among practitioners in the major urologic subspecialties.
Overall, 851 faculty members from 101 academic urology departments were organized by academic rank and fellowship completed. Research productivity was calculated using the h-index, calculated from the Scopus database.
There was no statistical difference in h-index found between fellowship-trained and nonfellowship-trained academic urologists. The highest h-indices were seen among urologic oncologists (18.1 ± 0.95) and nonfellowship-trained urologists (14.62 ± 0.80). Nearly 70% of department chairs included in this analysis were urologic oncologists or general urologists.
No difference in h-index existed between fellowship-trained and nonfellowship-trained urologists, although practitioners in the subspecialty cohorts with the highest research productivity (nonfellowship-trained and urologic oncologists) comprised 70% of department chairpersons. This relationship suggests that a strong research profile is highly valued during selection for academic promotion. Differences existed on further comparison by subspecialty. Fellowship training may represent another potential opportunity to introduce structured research experiences for trainees.
住院医师寻求住院医师后 fellowship 培训,以提高其在新型手术技术方面的能力,并扩充其知识储备。研究产出是学术泌尿学发展的重要组成部分。我们的目标是使用 h 指数(一种客观且易于获取的文献计量指标,已多次表明其与泌尿学及其他专业的学术影响力、资金获取和学术晋升相关)来确定 fellowship 培训与学术泌尿学家的学术影响力之间是否存在任何关系。还进行了进一步分析,以确定主要泌尿学亚专业的从业者在学术影响力方面是否存在差异。
总体而言,来自 101 个学术泌尿学系的 851 名教员按学术职级和完成的 fellowship培训进行了分组。使用从 Scopus 数据库计算得出的 h 指数来计算研究产出。
接受 fellowship 培训和未接受 fellowship 培训的学术泌尿学家之间的 h 指数没有统计学差异。泌尿肿瘤学家(18.1±0.95)和未接受 fellowship 培训的泌尿学家(14.62±0.80)的 h 指数最高。纳入该分析的系主任中近 70%是泌尿肿瘤学家或普通泌尿学家。
接受 fellowship 培训和未接受 fellowship 培训的泌尿学家之间的 h 指数没有差异,尽管研究产出最高的亚专业组(未接受 fellowship 培训的和泌尿肿瘤学家)的从业者占系主任的 70%。这种关系表明,在学术晋升选拔过程中,强大的研究背景受到高度重视。按亚专业进一步比较存在差异。fellowship 培训可能是为学员引入结构化研究经验的另一个潜在机会。