Sood Aditya, Therattil Paul J, Chung Stella, Lee Edward S
Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers University-New Jersey Medical School, Newark.
Eplasty. 2015 Nov 18;15:e50. eCollection 2015.
The impact of subspecialty fellowship training on research productivity among academic plastic surgeons is unknown. The authors' aim of this study was to (1) describe the current fellowship representation in academic plastic surgery and (2) evaluate the relationship between h-index and subspecialty fellowship training by experience and type.
Academic plastic surgery faculty (N = 590) were identified through an Internet-based search of all ACGME-accredited integrated and combined residency programs. Research output was measured by h-index from the Scopus database as well as a number of peer-reviewed publications. The Kruskal-Wallis test, with a subsequent Mann-Whitney U test, was used for statistical analysis to determine correlations.
In the United States, 72% (n = 426) of academic plastic surgeons had trained in 1 or more subspecialty fellowship program. Within this cohort, the largest group had completed multiple fellowships (28%), followed by hand (23%), craniofacial (22%), microsurgery (15%), research (8%), cosmetic (3%), burn (2%), and wound healing (0.5%). Higher h-indices correlated with a research fellowship (12.5; P < .01) and multiple fellowships (10.4; P < .01). Craniofacial-trained plastic surgeons demonstrated the next highest h-index (9.8), followed by no fellowship (8.4), microsurgery (8.3), hand (7.7), cosmetic (5.2), and burn (5.1).
Plastic surgeons with a research fellowship or at least 2 subspecialty fellowships had increased academic productivity compared with their colleagues. Craniofacial-trained physicians also demonstrated a higher marker for academic productivity than multiple other specialties. In this study, we show that the type and number of fellowships influence the h-index and further identification of such variables may help improve academic mentorship and productivity within academic plastic surgery.
亚专科 fellowship 培训对学术型整形外科医生研究生产力的影响尚不清楚。本研究作者的目的是：（1）描述目前学术型整形外科中亚专科 fellowship 的情况；（2）按经验和类型评估 h 指数与亚专科 fellowship 培训之间的关系。
通过基于互联网搜索所有经 ACGME 认证的综合和联合住院医师项目，确定学术型整形外科教员（N = 590）。研究产出通过 Scopus 数据库中的 h 指数以及一些同行评审出版物来衡量。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验及随后的 Mann-Whitney U 检验进行统计分析以确定相关性。
在美国，72%（n = 426）的学术型整形外科医生接受过 1 个或更多亚专科 fellowship 项目的培训。在这个队列中，最大的群体是完成了多个 fellowship 的医生（28%），其次是手部（23%）、颅面（22%）、显微外科（15%）、研究（8%）、美容（3%）、烧伤（2%）和伤口愈合（0.5%）。较高的 h 指数与研究 fellowship（12.5；P <.01）和多个 fellowship（10.4；P <.01）相关。接受颅面培训的整形外科医生的 h 指数次之（9.8），其次是未接受 fellowship 培训的医生（8.4）、显微外科（8.3）、手部（7.7）、美容（5.2）和烧伤（5.1）。
与同行相比，拥有研究 fellowship 或至少 2 个亚专科 fellowship 的整形外科医生学术生产力有所提高。接受颅面培训的医生在学术生产力方面也高于其他多个专科。在本研究中，我们表明 fellowship 的类型和数量会影响 h 指数，进一步识别这些变量可能有助于改善学术型整形外科中的学术指导和生产力。
