Analysis of Factors That Influence Academic Productivity Among Neurological and Orthopedic Spine Surgeons

Background: Academic productivity plays a growing role in professional advancement in academic medicine. This study aimed to assess academic productivity among spine surgeons by investigating differences in h indices between neurological and orthopedic spine surgeons.

Methods: The American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) Neurosurgical Residency Training Program Directory provided names of U.S. and Canadian academic neurological surgeons. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools database was consulted for NIH funding statuses of the surgeons. Scopus yielded the h indices. Orthopedic spine surgeons were identified at the same institutions as the neurological spine surgeons, and NIH funding statuses and h indices were identified from the same databases. Differences between the disciplines and across the categories of NIH funding receipt, having a Ph.D., and academic rank were analyzed.

Results: Inclusion criteria were met by 215 neurological spine surgeons and 513 orthopedic spine surgeons. Neurological spine surgeons had a mean h index of 21.16, and orthopedic spine surgeons had a mean h index of 14.08 (P < 0.0001). Neurological surgeons with NIH funding had higher (P < 0.0001) h indices (34.15) than surgeons without funding (19.29). Likewise, orthopedic surgeons with NIH funding had higher (P < 0.001) h indices (42.83) than surgeons without funding (13.39). Analysis of variance showed that department chairmen and professors had higher h indices than associate or assistant professors among neurological (P < 0.01) and orthopedic (P < 0.001) surgeons.

Conclusions: These results demonstrate the importance of the h index in measuring academic productivity among neurological and orthopedic spine surgeons.