Scholarly Impact of Student Participation in Radiation Oncology Research

Paracha, Munizay; Kim, Kristine; Qureshi, Muhammad M.; Shah, Aishwarya; Agarwal, Ankit; Sachs, Teviah E.; Sarfaty, Suzanne; Hirsch, Ariel E.

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.02.154

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the impact of student authorship on the H i of CAs may be stronger in ophthalmology compared to other fields of medicine previously studied. 9 10 11 12 In contrast to our findings, the change in mean H i was not significantly different between nStA and StA in the fields of general surgery, radiation oncology, and internal medicine. 9 10 11 12 The difference in results may be due to differences in statistical analysis in our work compared to the studies in other fields, rather than intrinsic differences between medical fields.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“… 9 10 11 12 In contrast to our findings, the change in mean H i was not significantly different between nStA and StA in the fields of general surgery, radiation oncology, and internal medicine. 9 10 11 12 The difference in results may be due to differences in statistical analysis in our work compared to the studies in other fields, rather than intrinsic differences between medical fields. Unlike previously published works, our analysis was adjusted for potential confounders including the number of published research items, baseline H i , the academic appointment of CAs, and the year the CA published their article.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Existing literature uses the H i to analyze the effects of student authorship in other fields of medicine, namely radiation oncology, general surgery, and otolaryngology. 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 Our study aimed to analyze student contribution to research within the field of ophthalmology. We found that the scholarly impact, as measured by H i , was higher for CAs who published with students compared to those who did not, achieving significance when combining data on CAs who published in 2008, 2012, and 2016.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Scholarly Impact of Student Authorship in Ophthalmology

Prasad

Paracha

Goodman

et al. 2023

Journal of Academic Ophthalmology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The H-index (Hi), an author-level metric of scholarly impact, is predictive of future scientific achievement. We sought to analyze the scholarly impact of student authorship on the Hi of corresponding authors (CAs) within a major academic journal in the specialty of ophthalmology. Materials and Methods We compared the Hi of all unique CAs for manuscripts published in Ophthalmology (Journal of the American Academy of Ophthalmology) in 2008, 2012, and 2016. Data abstraction was completed twice: in October 2018 and March 2021. We further grouped published articles for CAs into those with student authors (StA) and those without (nStA). Primary analysis involved a linear regression analysis with change in Hi from October 2018 to March 2021 as the outcome variable, CA groups as the predictor variable, adjusting for the covariates of baseline Hi, the year when the CA published his or her article, number of research items published in October 2018, and the academic appointment of the CAs. Secondary analysis involved a linear regression analysis with change in Hi from October 2018 to March 2021 as the outcome variable, total number of student authors per CA as the predictor variable, adjusting for the covariates of baseline Hi, the year CA published his or her article, number of research items published in October 2018, and the academic appointment of the CAs. Results The number of student authors increased from 168 in 2008 to 192 in 2016. Of the 902 articles, 316 articles were co-authored by one or more student authors. The average change in Hi of CAs publishing with student authors (StA, 11.0 ± 14.7) was significantly greater (p < 0.0001) than the change in Hi of CAs publishing without student authors (nStA, 6.2 ± 6.2). As the total number of student authors increased, the change in Hi of CAs increased linearly for all years combined (regression coefficient = 1.70, p-value < 0.0001). Conclusion CAs publishing with students in the field of ophthalmology have a higher scholarly impact than those publishing without students. The development of programs to integrate students into ophthalmology research early on may encourage their pursuit of a career in ophthalmology, while advancing the careers of their mentors.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Scholarly Impact of Student Authorship in Ophthalmology

Prasad

Paracha

Goodman

et al. 2023

Journal of Academic Ophthalmology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been previous studies examining specific career fields, for instance, surgical specialties and radiation oncology, though no papers have looked at broader career fields as indicators of more generalized student trends. 31 , 32 Given the size and breadth of internal medicine as a field, this will offer insight into the underlying changes of student authorship on scholarly impact for a large cohort population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Medical Student Contributions on Academic Productivity: Analysis of Student Authorship Over Time

Kan

Qureshi

Paracha

et al. 2021

AMEP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Understanding the trend of student authorship is crucial in determining its correlation to scholarly impact for corresponding authors. Our objective is to investigate student authorship rates over time in articles published in JAMA Internal Medicine (IM), as well as to examine potential effects student authors have on scholarly impact scores of corresponding authors via H-index measures. Methods: Authorship data including student authors (SA), first student authors, and corresponding authors (CA) from prior JAMA IM publications between 2010 and 2018 were collected, with a total of 701 studies. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent sample t-tests were performed to assess for differences in the mean by publishing year and student authorship, respectively. Results: Of 4591 total authors, 683 (14.9%) were considered student authors. The percentage of student authorship increased from 46.3% to 58.0% between 2010 and 2018, respectively. No difference in average H-indices of CA between SA and non-SA groups (overall NSA H i mean: 30.2, vs SA H i mean: 32.1, p=0.371) was noted. Discussion: Student participation in research is not a disadvantage to scholarly impact for corresponding authors. Increased student authorship reflects a promising trend towards greater student participation in research within the field of medicine.

show abstract

“…Historically RO has been a competitive specialty, and the need for research experience to be competitive in the match may have motivated students to pursue research or clinical opportunities. 8 , 18 In recent years, however, substantially fewer US MSs have applied for RO residency positions, 13 and it may be necessary for radiation oncologists to take a more proactive approach in attracting high quality and diverse students. 5 Mentoring students requires effort, and it is critical that a department's culture supports these efforts by providing individual radiation oncologists with adequate time, resources, and encouragement to facilitate their work with students.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%