Nationwide Bibliometric Analysis of Integrated Plastic Surgery Program Directors

Abstract

Background: Studies have linked bibliometric indices with the academic level of plastic surgeons, but this relationship has not been explored with residency program directors (PDs). As teachers of the next generation, PDs’ academic performance is an important component of residency program success. We sought to identify distinguishing characteristics of integrated plastic surgery programs, focusing on their PD bibliometric indices. Methods: We identified plastic surgery programs based on 2021 Doximity reputation and research output rankings, respectively, and then divided them into four quartiles (Q1–Q4). PD academic history and bibliometric indices (h-index, the number of publications, and citations) were collected through Doximity profiles and program websites: PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Results: Eighty-four programs were identified. There was a significant positive relationship between h-index, the number of publications, and type of research with reputation ranking (P < 0.05). After adjusting for years of experience post-training, h-index (OR = 1.24; P < 0.001) and the number of publications (OR = 1.05, P < 0.001) were significantly associated with reputation ranking. There was a statistically significant relationship between PD research fellowship completion and research output ranking (P < 0.01). After adjusting for years of experience post-training, h-index (OR = 1.05; P = 0.047) and the number of publications (OR = 1.01; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with research output ranking. Conclusion: Higher ranked programs tend to have PDs who have a strong record of scholarly activity, as evidenced by certain bibliometric indices.

The Impact of a Centralized Plastic Surgery Research Infrastructure on Scholarly Productivity and Output

“…Moreover, PRS programs are ranked with research productivity as a central parameter. 3 For residents, program reputation and affiliated medical school research rankings are associated with greater research output during integrated PRS training, demonstrating the need for institutional support in facilitating critical inquiry. 4 Despite the focus on research productivity within PRS, the impact of team structure, interpersonal dynamics, and/or standardized infrastructure on scholarly output is infrequently studied.…”

“…Moreover, PRS programs are ranked with research productivity as a central parameter. 3 For residents, program reputation and affiliated medical school research rankings are associated with greater research output during integrated PRS training, demonstrating the need for institutional support in facilitating critical inquiry. 4…”