In gratitude of the loyal support of our members, the CNS is offering complimentary 2021 Annual Meeting registration to all members! Learn more.

  • An analysis of publication productivity for 1,225 academic neurosurgeons and 99 departments

    Final Number:

    Paul Klimo MD, MPH; Nickalus Khan MD; Clinton Thompson; Douglas Taylor BS; Garrett T. Venable BS; R. Matthew Wham BS; Frederick A. Boop MD

    Study Design:

    Subject Category:

    Meeting: Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2013 Annual Meeting

    Introduction: Bibliometrics is defined as the study of statistical and mathematical methods used to quantitatively analyze scientific literature. The application of bibliometrics in neurosurgery is in its infancy. The authors calculate a number of publication productivity measures for almost all academic neurosurgeons and departments within the United States.

    Methods: The h-index, g-index, m-quotient, and contemporary (hc) h-index were calculated for 1,225 academic neurosurgeons in 99 (out of 101) programs listed by the ACGME for 2013. Three currently available citation databases were used: Google Scholar (GS), Scopus, and Web of Science (WOS). Bibliometric profiles were created for each individual surgeon. Comparisons based on academic rank (chairman, professor, associate, assistant & instructor), gender and subspecialties were performed. Departments were ranked based on the summation of individual faculty h-indices. Calculations were carried out from January-February of 2013.

    Results: The median h-index, g-index, hc, and m-quotient are 11, 20, 8, and 0.62 respectively with positively skewed distributions. All indices demonstrated a positive relationship with increasing academic rank (p<0.001). Neurosurgeons with subspecialties in radiosurgery (n=41) and peripheral nerve (n=18) have the highest median h-indices and general (n=95) and spine (n=294) neurosurgeons had the lowest. The median h-index was 11 for males (n=1,144) and 8 for females (n=81). The h-index, g-index and hc significantly varied by gender (p<0.003); however, when using the m-quotient, which corrects for time since first publication, or stratifying by academic rank this difference was no longer significant (p=0.153 and p=0.084, respectively). There is individual variability depending on which database is used and how searches are performed. Based on our analysis, the top 5 programs for publication productivity are UCSF, BNI, Johns Hopkins, Pittsburgh, and UCLA.

    Conclusions: This study represents the most detailed publication analysis of academic neurosurgeons and their programs to date. The results for the metrics presented should be viewed as academic benchmarks for comparison purposes. It is our hope that organized neurosurgery will adopt and continue to refine bibliometric profiling of individuals and departments.

    Patient Care: This research is not directly related to patient care.

    Learning Objectives: By the conclusion of this session, participants should be able to: 1. Understand the application of bibliometrics to publication productivity. 2. Describe some of the bibliometric benchmarks in neurosurgery. 3. Future applications of bibliometrics in neurosurgery. 2. Describe some of the


We use cookies to improve the performance of our site, to analyze the traffic to our site, and to personalize your experience of the site. You can control cookies through your browser settings. Please find more information on the cookies used on our site. Privacy Policy