Suppr超能文献

以h指数评估专科培训对学术麻醉医师同行评审出版物产出的影响

The Impact of Fellowship Training on Peer-Reviewed Publication Productivity in Academic Anesthesiologists as Evaluated by the h-Index.

作者信息

Zavala Acsa M, Heir Jagtar Singh, Cata Juan P, Feng Lei, Soliz Jose M

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology & PeriOperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

出版信息

Adv Cancer Educ Qual Improv. 2025 Jun;1(1). doi: 10.52519/aceqi.25.1.1.a8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The effect of anesthesiology fellowships on scholarly contributions has been minimally studied. In this study we analyzed differences in h-index between fellowship-trained and non-fellowship-trained anesthesiologists, as well as by type of fellowship, academic rank, and years in practice.

METHODS

All anesthesiologists on staff between September 1, 2021, and August 31, 2022, were included in this study. The variables collected were fellowship training status, h-index, total number of publications, years in practice, academic rank, and years at the institution. For analysis, the anesthesiologists were divided into 2 groups: those with fellowship training and those without.

RESULTS

Among 78 anesthesiologists, 40 were not fellowship-trained and 38 were, with 10 types of anesthesiology fellowships identified. The h-index and number of publications did not differ between fellowship-trained and non-fellowship-trained anesthesiologists, and the number of publications per years in practice did not differ by fellowship type. The number of publications per years in practice was higher in the fellowship-trained group than in the non-fellowship-trained group (1.2 ± 1.1 vs. 0.71 ± 0.6; P = .04), as was the number of publications per years in practice at our institution (1.5 ± 1.1 compared with 0.9 ± 0.9; P = .0093).

CONCLUSION

Fellowship training among academic anesthesiologists was not associated with a difference in h-index. However, fellowship training was associated with a higher number of publications per years in practice. Further research could elucidate the usefulness of h-index to support career development and contributions of anesthesiologists in academia.

摘要

背景

麻醉学 fellowship 对学术贡献的影响研究极少。在本研究中,我们分析了接受 fellowship 培训和未接受 fellowship 培训的麻醉医生之间 h 指数的差异,以及按 fellowship 类型、学术职称和从业年限的差异。

方法

纳入 2021 年 9 月 1 日至 2022 年 8 月 31 日在职的所有麻醉医生。收集的变量包括 fellowship 培训状态、h 指数、发表文章总数、从业年限、学术职称以及在该机构的工作年限。为进行分析,将麻醉医生分为两组:接受 fellowship 培训的和未接受的。

结果

在 78 名麻醉医生中,40 名未接受 fellowship 培训,38 名接受了,共确定了 10 种麻醉学 fellowship 类型。接受 fellowship 培训和未接受 fellowship 培训的麻醉医生之间的 h 指数和发表文章数量没有差异,且每年发表文章数量不因 fellowship 类型而异。接受 fellowship 培训组每年发表文章数量高于未接受 fellowship 培训组(1.2±1.1 对 0.71±0.6;P = 0.04),在我们机构每年发表文章数量也是如此(1.5±1.1 对比 0.9±0.9;P = 0.0093)。

结论

学术麻醉医生的 fellowship 培训与 h 指数差异无关。然而,fellowship 培训与每年更高的发表文章数量相关。进一步研究可阐明 h 指数对支持麻醉医生在学术界的职业发展和贡献的有用性。

相似文献

8
Research Productivity of Sports Medicine Fellowship Faculty.运动医学 fellowship 教员的研究生产力
Orthop J Sports Med. 2016 Dec 30;4(12):2325967116679393. doi: 10.1177/2325967116679393. eCollection 2016 Dec.
10
Rhinology fellowship training and its scholarly impact.鼻科学 fellowship 培训及其学术影响。
Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2013 Sep 1;27(5):131-134. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2013.27.3947.

本文引用的文献

1
The h-Index: Understanding its predictors, significance, and criticism.h指数:了解其预测因素、意义及批评意见。
J Family Med Prim Care. 2023 Nov;12(11):2531-2537. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1613_23. Epub 2023 Nov 21.
10
Bibliometrics of anaesthesia researchers in the UK.英国麻醉研究人员的文献计量学研究
Br J Anaesth. 2011 Sep;107(3):351-6. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer124. Epub 2011 May 26.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验