The Standardized Inclusive Numeric Academic Index: An Index to Measure Academic Productivity in Plastic Surgery

MedStar author(s):
Citation: Annals of Plastic Surgery. 89(5):560-563, 2022 11 01.PMID: 35703184Department: MedStar Georgetown University Hospital/MedStar Washington Hospital Center | Plastic Surgery ResidencyForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Biomedical Research | *Surgery, Plastic | Bibliometrics | Cross-Sectional Studies | Efficiency | Faculty, Medical | Humans | Reproducibility of Results | TocopherolsYear: 2022Local holdings: Available online from MWHC library: 2001 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2006ISSN:
  • 0148-7043
Name of journal: Annals of plastic surgeryAbstract: CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that the standardized inclusive numeric academic index may be used as a valid, comprehensive measure of academic productivity. Future studies should assess its application across different medical specialties. Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.METHODS: From 2016 to 2018, an online cross-sectional survey was distributed to faculty members at an academic institution and plastic surgeons from different academic levels nationwide. Respondents were presented with randomized, binary comparisons of 42 different achievements of an academic physician and asked to choose the more important achievement. Descriptive statistics of demographics and "win rates" of each achievement were reported and an algorithm for academic productivity scoring was designed. To validate the proposed index, 30 curricula vitae of academic surgeons were anonymized and ranked in order of increasing academic achievement by 6 volunteers. Interrater reliability was assessed by Krippendorff alpha (alpha >= 0.800).PURPOSE: Academic productivity is a poorly defined metric that is commonly used to determine faculty career advancement. While various indices incorporate scholarly activity, no specific index assimilates the perceived importance of a variety of academic accomplishments a physician may make. Herein, the development and validation of an algorithm to generate an academic productivity score based on surveying physicians nationwide are described.RESULTS: Survey respondents completed an average of 116 (SD, 97.6) comparisons each, generating a total of 14,736 ranked comparisons. Of the 42 variables, the highest win rates were attained by being the dean of a medical school (0.90) and editor of a medical journal (0.88). The lowest win rates were attained by industry spokesperson (0.1) and members of the local medical society (0.1). Initial validity evidence found the interrater reliability for the 6 rankers to have a Krippendorff alpha value of 0.843. The interrater reliability between the average rater ranking and the algorithm-generated ranking had a Krippendorff alpha value of 0.925.All authors: Ibelli TJ, Li H, Margulies IG, Paine KM, Sayegh F, Taub PJ, Warburton A, Zoghbi YFiscal year: FY2023Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2022-12-13
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 35703184 Available 35703184

Available online from MWHC library: 2001 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2006

CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that the standardized inclusive numeric academic index may be used as a valid, comprehensive measure of academic productivity. Future studies should assess its application across different medical specialties. Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

METHODS: From 2016 to 2018, an online cross-sectional survey was distributed to faculty members at an academic institution and plastic surgeons from different academic levels nationwide. Respondents were presented with randomized, binary comparisons of 42 different achievements of an academic physician and asked to choose the more important achievement. Descriptive statistics of demographics and "win rates" of each achievement were reported and an algorithm for academic productivity scoring was designed. To validate the proposed index, 30 curricula vitae of academic surgeons were anonymized and ranked in order of increasing academic achievement by 6 volunteers. Interrater reliability was assessed by Krippendorff alpha (alpha >= 0.800).

PURPOSE: Academic productivity is a poorly defined metric that is commonly used to determine faculty career advancement. While various indices incorporate scholarly activity, no specific index assimilates the perceived importance of a variety of academic accomplishments a physician may make. Herein, the development and validation of an algorithm to generate an academic productivity score based on surveying physicians nationwide are described.

RESULTS: Survey respondents completed an average of 116 (SD, 97.6) comparisons each, generating a total of 14,736 ranked comparisons. Of the 42 variables, the highest win rates were attained by being the dean of a medical school (0.90) and editor of a medical journal (0.88). The lowest win rates were attained by industry spokesperson (0.1) and members of the local medical society (0.1). Initial validity evidence found the interrater reliability for the 6 rankers to have a Krippendorff alpha value of 0.843. The interrater reliability between the average rater ranking and the algorithm-generated ranking had a Krippendorff alpha value of 0.925.

English

Powered by Koha