University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA.
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2019 Jun;26(6):594-604. doi: 10.1111/acem.13704. Epub 2019 Mar 7.
Quantifying and benchmarking scholarly productivity of emergency medicine faculty is challenging. While performance indicators including publication and citation counts are available, use of indicators to create normative references has lagged. The authors developed methodology to benchmark emergency medicine academician scholarly productivity (e.g., publications over time) and impact (e.g., citations per publication over time) against an appropriate reference group.
The methodology includes: 1) define time frame and scholarly metrics; 2) identify representative population; 3) reconcile alternative author names; 4) use analytic tool to identify scholarly output; 5) build database containing metrics; and 6) create benchmarking statistics, including subsamples. This study included emergency medicine faculty from 2011 to 2015, with total peer-reviewed publications and citations per publication as scholarly metrics.
In the United States at the time of the search (2016) there were 200 academic emergency departments, 186 with public faculty listings, which yielded 6,727 academicians. For each academician, the authors calculated statistics about peer-reviewed publications and average citations per publication from 2011 to 2015 and created benchmarking rulers using percentile ranks. Productivity by year of graduation with terminal degree was compared within each subsample, finding that newly graduated faculty demonstrated higher productivity than their within-rank peers who graduated earlier. Finally, benchmarking tables were created that allow comparison of peer-reviewed publication counts and citations per publication for individual academicians against the norm.
This benchmarking method can serve as a model for norm-based scaling of scholarly productivity for emergency medicine. This has important implications for performance review, promotion and hiring, and evaluating group productivity.
量化和基准化急诊医学教师的学术成果具有挑战性。虽然有出版物和引用量等绩效指标，但使用指标来创建规范参考标准的做法却滞后了。作者开发了一种方法，用于将急诊医学学者的学术成果（例如，随时间推移的出版物）和影响力（例如，随时间推移的每篇出版物的引用量）与适当的参考组进行基准比较。
该方法包括：1）定义时间框架和学术指标；2）确定代表性人群；3）协调替代作者姓名；4）使用分析工具识别学术产出；5）构建包含指标的数据库；6）创建基准统计数据，包括子样本。本研究包括 2011 年至 2015 年的急诊医学教师，以同行评审出版物总数和每篇出版物的引用量作为学术指标。
在搜索时（2016 年），美国共有 200 个学术急诊部门，其中 186 个部门有公开的教职员工名单，共产生了 6727 名学者。对于每位学者，作者计算了 2011 年至 2015 年的同行评审出版物和平均每篇出版物引用量的统计数据，并使用百分位排名创建了基准标尺。在每个子样本中比较了毕业年限与最高学位的生产力，发现新毕业的教师比更早毕业的同级别同事的生产力更高。最后，创建了基准表，允许将个别学者的同行评审出版物数量和每篇出版物的引用量与规范进行比较。
这种基准方法可以作为急诊医学学术生产力基于规范的缩放模型。这对绩效评估、晋升和招聘以及评估团队生产力具有重要意义。
