The h-index in medical education: an analysis of medical education journal editorial boards

Doja, Asif, Eady, Kaylee, Horsley, Tanya, Bould, M Dylan, Victor, J Charles and Sampson, Margaret The h-index in medical education: an analysis of medical education journal editorial boards. BMC Medical Education, 2014, vol. 14, n. 251. [Journal article (Unpaginated)]

[thumbnail of 12909_2014_Article_251.pdf] Text
12909_2014_Article_251.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (371kB)

English abstract

Abstract Background: Disciplines differ in their authorship and citation practices, thus discipline-specific h-index norms are desirable. Thus the goal of this study was to examine the relationship between the h-index and academic rank in the field of medical education, and the differences in the h-index between MD’s and PhD’s in this field. Methods: Due to the absence of a formalized registry of medical educators, we sampled available editorial board membership (considered a proxy for identifying ‘career’ medical educators) to establish h-index values. These were determined using Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS), and internet searching was used to determine their academic rank. The correlation between authors’ h-indices derived from WoS and GS was also determined. Results: 130 editors were identified (95 full professors, 21 associate professors, 14 assistant professors). A significant difference was noted between the h-indices of full professors and associate/assistant professors (p < .001). Median h-indices equaled 14 for full professors (Interquartile range [IQR] =11); 7 for associate professors (IQR =7) and 6.5 for assistant professors (IQR = 8). h-indices of MD’s and PhD’s did not differ significantly. Moderate correlation between GS and WOS h-indices was noted R = 0.46, p < .001. Conclusions: The results provide some guidance as to the expected h-indices of a select group of medical educators. No differences appear to exist between assistant professor and associate professor ranks or between MD’s and PhD’s.

Spanish abstract

El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar la relación entre el índice h y el rango académico en el campo de la educación médica. Debido a la ausencia de un registro formal de los educadores médicos, éstos se determinaron utilizando Web of Science (WoS) y Google Scholar (GS), y la búsqueda en Internet se utilizó para determinar su rango académico. Los resultados proporcionan alguna orientación sobre los índices h esperados de un selecto grupo de educadores médicos. No parecen existir diferencias entre profesor asistente y profesor asociado, o entre MD y PhD.

Item type: Journal article (Unpaginated)
Keywords: h-index; Academic productivity; Medical education; índice h; productividad académica; revistas de educación médica.
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user: Ms Yolanda Galvez
Date deposited: 02 Oct 2015 18:36
Last modified: 04 Oct 2015 10:45
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/28050

References

Seglen PO: Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 1997, 314:498–502.

Bordons M, Fernandez MT, Gomez I: Advantages and limitations of the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance. Scientometrics 2002, 53:195–206.

Hirsch JE: An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Sciences-New York 2005, 102:16569–16572.

Bornmann L, Daniel HD: What do we know about the h index? J Am Soc Inform Sci 2007, 58:1381–1385.

Rousseau R: Reflections on recent developments of the h-index and h-type indices. In Proceedings of WIS 2008, Fourth International Conference on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Ninth COLLNET Meeting. Edited by Kretschmer H, Havemann F. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute for Library and Information Science (IBI); 2008.

Bornmann L, Daniel H: The state of h index research. Is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance? EMBO reports 2009, 10:2–6.

Spearman CM, Quigley MJ, Quigley MR, Wilberger JE: Survey of the h index for all of academic neurosurgery: another power-law phenomenon? J Neurosurg 2010, 113:929–933.

Lee J, Kristin KL, Couldwell WT: Use of the h index in neurosurgery. J Neurosurg 2009, 111:387–392.

Moppett IK, Hardman JG: Bibiliometrics of anaesthesia researchers in the UK. Br J Anaesth 2011, 107:351–356.

Bould MD, Boet S, Sharma B, Shin E, Barrowman NJ, Grantcharov A: h-indices in a university department of anaesthesia: an evaluation of their feasibility, reliability, and validity as an assessment of academic performance. Br J Anaesth 2011, 106:325–330.

Benway BM, Kalidas P, Cabello JM, Bhayani SB: Does citation analysis reveal association between h-index and academic rank in urology? Urology 2009, 74:30–33.

Choi M, Fuller CD, Thomas CR Jr: Estimation of citation-based scholarly activity among radiation oncology faculty at domestic residency-training institutions: 1996–2007. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 74:172–178.

Pagel PS, Hudetz JA: H-index is a sensitive indicator of academic activity in highly productive anaesthesiologists: results of a bibliometric analysis. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2011, 55:1085–1089.

Sharma B, Boet S, Grantcharov T, Shin E, Barrowman NJ, Bould MD: The h-index outperforms other bibliometrics in the assessment of research performance in general surgery: A province-wide study. Surgery 2011, 153:493–501.

Morahan PS, Fleetwood J: The double helix of activity and scholarship: building a medical education career with limited resources. Med Educ 2008, 42:34–44.

Simpson D, Fincher RE, Hafler JP, Irby DM, Richards BF, Rosenfeld GC, Viggiano TR: Advancing educators and education by defining the components and evidence associated with educational scholarship. Med Educ 2007, 41:1002–1009.

Nutter DO, Bond JS, Coller BS, D’Alessandri RM, Gewertz BL, Nora LM, Perkins JP, Shomaker TS, Watson RT: Measuring faculty effort and contributions in medical education. Acad Med 2000, 75:199–207.

Hauer KE, Papadakis MA: Assessment of the contributions of clinician educators. J Gen Intern Med 2009, 25:5–6.

Crespo JA, Li Y, Ruiz–Castillo J: The Measurement of the Effect on Citation Inequality of Differences in Citation Practices across Scientific Fields. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e58727. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058727.

Iglesias JE, Pecharroman C: Scaling the h-index for different scientific ISI fields. Scientometrics 2007, 73:303–320.

Imperial J, Rodriguez-Navarro A: Usefulness of Hirsch’s h-index to evaluate scientific research in Spain. Scientometrics 2007, 71:271–282.

Egghe L: Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 2006, 69:131–152.

Sidiropoulos A, Katsaros D, Manolopoulos Y: Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics 2007, 72:253–280.

Jin B, Liang L, Rousseau R, Egghe L: The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Sci Bull 2007, 52:855–863.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS