Associations Between Academic Rank and Advanced Bibliometric Indices Among United States Academic Radiologists

Rationale and objectives: This study aimed to evaluate associations between traditional and advanced bibliometric indices with academic rank for radiologists in the United States.

Methods: Faculty web pages were searched to classify 538 members of the Association of University Radiologists as assistant (n = 212), associate (n = 128), or full (n = 198) professors. Radiologists' publication and citation records were extracted from Scopus to compute the following indices: publication count, citation count, h-index, i-10 index, h_c-index, m-quotient, e-index, and g-index. Analysis of variance, multivariable logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were performed.

Results: All indices were significantly different among the three groups (P ≤.001), progressively increasing with increasing rank (eg, mean publication count of 17, 41, and 128 among assistant, associate, and full professors, respectively; mean citation count of 205, 687, and 3622, respectively; mean h-index of 5, 11, and 27, respectively). At multivariable analysis, the h-index (reflecting publications and citations) was a strong significant independent positive predictor of associate (β=+0.32, P <.001) or full professor (β=+0.26, P <.001) status, whereas the m-quotient (adjusted h-index that is greater for more rapid publication) was a strong significant independent negative predictor of associate (β=-1.87, P = .009) or full professor (β =-4.97, P <.001) status. The models exhibited moderate goodness-of-fit (r² = 0.534-0.655; P <.001). The model for predicting at least associate professor achieved area under the curve 0.876 (sensitivity 74.6%, specificity 88.8%). The model for predicting full professor achieved area under the curve 0.925 (sensitivity 85.5%, specificity 86.1%).

Conclusion: When controlling for the h-index, more rapid publication, as indicated by the m-quotient, was negatively associated with radiologists' academic rank, indicating the additional influence of career duration in promotions decisions.