Is the h-index Predictive of Greater NIH Funding Success Among Academic Radiologists?

doi:10.1016/j.acra.2011.06.017

Academic Radiology

Volume 18, Issue 11, November 2011, Pages 1337-1340

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2011.06.017 Get rights and content

Rationale and Objectives

Despite rapid adoption of the Hirsch index (h-index) as a measure of academic success, the correlations between the h-index and other metrics of productivity remain poorly understood. The aims of this study were to determine whether h-indices were associated with greater National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding success among academic radiologists.

Materials and Methods

Using the Scopus database, h-indices were calculated for a random sample of academic radiologists with the rank of professor. Using the NIH tool Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports, we determined the number, classification, and total years of NIH grant funding as principal investigator for each radiologist. Differences in h-index, sorted by funding status, were determined using Wilcoxon's tests. Associations between h-index and funding status were determined using logistic regression. Significant correlations between h-index and grant metrics were determined using Spearman's ρ.

Results

Among 210 professors of radiology, 48 (23%) secured at least one NIH grant. The mean h-index was significantly higher among individuals who secured at least one NIH grant (19.1) compared to those who did not (10.4) (P < .0001). Professors with h-indices < 10 compared to those with h-indices > 10 were significantly less likely to receive NIH funding (odds ratio, 0.07; P = .0321). However, h-indices > 10 were not significantly predictive of greater funding. No significant relationships were observed between h-index and the number of grant awards, years of prior funding, the amounts of grant awards, or grant classification.

Conclusion

Having obtained at least one NIH grant was associated with a higher h-index, yet multiple or large grants, such as those for program projects, were not predictive of higher h-indices.

Section snippets

Data Selection

One third of all academic radiology programs participating in the National Resident Matching Program in 2009 were selected at random for further study using a random number generator, as previously described (3). Among these programs, full academic professors of radiology were identified from each respective radiology department using public information provided on institutional Web sites. The academic training (MD, MD-PhD, or PhD) and credentials of these individuals were considered for future

Study Population

Two-hundred ten professors of radiology were identified from 45 academic medical centers using the search scheme outlined earlier. Among these individuals, 197 were medical doctors (MDs; 99% [196 of 197] were board-certified radiologists), nine were physician-scientists (MD-PhDs; 89% [eight of nine] were board-certified radiologists), and four were scientists (PhDs; none were board-certified radiologists). Among these 210 individuals, 48 (23% of the total; 40 MDs [40 of 197, or 20%], five

Discussion

The results of this study suggest that academic performance, as determined by the h-index, is higher among those who have secured NIH funding than those who have not. However, h-index was not significantly correlated with grant type, number of grant awards, duration of funding, or amount of grant awards. Taken together, these results suggest that NIH funding is only modestly predictive academic productivity among radiology professors.

To our knowledge, the current study represents the first

Conclusions

The h-index has been shown to be a useful tool in assessing academic productivity. Among academically mature radiologists, recipients of NIH funding support have significantly higher h-indices than those who are not funded, suggesting that these authors are more likely to have their work cited by others. However, the type of NIH grant, the number of secured NIH grants, and the amount of funding secured were not predictive of the h-index.

References (14)

M.E. Mullins
Has the time come for bibliometrics and the h-index in academic radiology?
Acad Radiol
(2010)
M.D. Bould et al.
h-Indices in a university department of anaesthesia: an evaluation of their feasibility, reliability, and validity as an assessment of academic performance
Br J Anaesth
(2011)
B.M. Benway et al.
Does citation analysis reveal association between h-index and academic rank in urology?
Urology
(2009)
J.E. Hirsch
An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
(2005)
P. Ball
Achievement index climbs the ranks
Nature
(2007)
A.E. Rad et al.
The h-index in academic radiology
Acad Radiol
(2010)
J.E. Hirsch
Does the h index have predictive power?
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
(2007)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (91)

External review letters in academic promotion and tenure decisions are reflective of reviewer characteristics
2024, Research Policy
We examine validity and bias in external review letters (ERLs) in academic settings. ERLs play a critical role in promotion and tenure (P&T) decisions across the globe, ending careers in some cases while allowing other scientists' careers to flourish. We coded and analyzed 995 ERLs submitted by letter writers at various institutions as part of the P&T portfolios of 195 candidates at an R1 university. We examined their relationship with P&T committees' percent of positive votes by department, college, and university committees. We investigated how ERL linguistic features, letter writer characteristics, and candidate characteristics (productivity and gender) relate to P&T decision-making. Results show writer characteristics are more strongly related than candidate characteristics to ERL linguistic features associated with P&T decisions at the department and university levels. We develop recommendations for policymakers, including changes in the use of ERLs for the P&T process.
Career Research Performance Among Radiology Early Career Grant Recipients Compared With National Institutes of Health K Award Recipients
2022, Journal of the American College of Radiology
To compare academic and demographic metrics among recipients of three major early career radiology, interventional radiology, and radiation oncology grants to National Institutes of Health (NIH) K awardees at the time the grants were awarded and then over the course of their careers.
Radiologists who received the RSNA Research Scholar Grant, General Electric Radiology Research Academic Fellowship (GERRAF), American Roentgen Ray Society (ARRS) Scholar Award, or NIH Career Development (K) Award before January 1, 2015, were included. Research metrics at the time of grant award (eg, publications) and subsequent scholarly productivity (eg, academic rank, h-index, NIH funding) were recorded until April 2020. Wilcoxon ranked-sum, χ², logistic regression, and standard least-square regression were used for data analysis.
There were 279 recipients: 48 K Award, 115 RSNA Research Scholar Grant, 36 ARRS, and 80 GERRAF. At the time of grant awarding, GERRAF recipients were less likely to have an MD-PhD degree (odds ratio [OR]: 0.36; P = .002) and were more likely to be women (OR: 1.55; P = .042) than K Award recipients. Similarly, recipients of the ARRS (OR: 2.87; P = .010) and GERRAF (OR: 3.19; P = .002) were more likely to have a master’s degree. Academic rank, leadership positions, and R01 funding were significant predictors of h-index and total publications over time. Academic rank and the GERRAF were significant predictors of subsequent NIH funding duration but there were no significant predictors of NIH funding amount.
Early career radiology awards, specifically the GERRAF, provide support for female and non-PhD investigators and result in comparable academic performance metrics to NIH K Award recipients.
National Institutes of Health: Gender Differences in Radiology Funding
2022, Academic Radiology
Citation Excerpt :
The h-index is an intuitive and objective metric that is defined as the number of an author's publications (h), which have been cited at least (h) times (36). Previous research has indicated that among academic radiologists, researchers with h-indices <10 were significantly less likely to receive National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding compared to those researchers with h-indices >10 (37). Given the context, it is therefore possible that female academic radiologists, who have historically experienced less academic productivity than their male counterparts, are also receiving less funding for their research.
Radiology has traditionally remained one of the most male-dominated specialties, although a higher proportion of women are now beginning to occupy roles as academic radiologists than their male counterparts. The present study investigated trends in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding within Diagnostic Radiology stratified by gender, and correlated with measures of academic output, including h-index.
Data on funding was obtained from the online NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditure and Results for fiscal years 2016–2019, and information regarding each Principal Investigator (PI) was obtained from the Scopus database and departmental websites. Mann-Whitney U tests were performed on collected data for statistical comparison of continuous variables.
Of the 2929 grants included in this analysis, 1789 (61.07%) were awarded to male PIs and 1140 (38.9%) to female PIs. Among PIs holding a PhD degree, male PIs had a higher mean grant amount ($619,807.00) compared to female PIs ($158,486.00).
Although female representation within academic radiology has been increasing, the mean NIH grants awarded to women is less than that awarded to men. Reasons for this are numerous and may include differential prioritization of career objectives among men and women, although such rationalization is inevitably speculative in nature. Significant gender differences in NIH funding were seen at the PhD level, and the strongest correlation between NIH funding and academic output was observed for the h-index of female PIs. These results underscore the fact that women are ostensibly being held to a higher academic standard than men in terms of funding decisions.
Current State of Bibliometric Research on the Scholarly Activity of Academic Radiologists
2022, Academic Radiology
In this review article, we discuss the literature pertaining to the bibliometric analysis of academic radiologists’ scholarly activity in order to identify current trends, knowledge gaps, and potential future directions. Current research provides cross-sectional analyses of bibliometrics on three main themes: academic ranking, gender disparity, and research funding. The most commonly used parameters are the publication and the citation counts, the h-index and the number of years in academia. The h-index correlates positively with academic ranking and, in the case of editorial board members, with the journal's impact factor. Scholars who have secured National Institutes of Health funding tend to have higher h-indexes than those who have not. Whereas gender balance has been achieved in medical school and in several medical specialties, women remain significantly fewer than men in most areas of radiology. The underrepresentation of women is particularly noticeable at higher academic ranks and in leadership positions, suggesting that significant barriers to female radiologists’ career advancement exist. Scholarly productivity of radiology residents and the impact of research on academic productivity are subjects that have received less attention in the published literature. Future studies should focus on whether bibliometric parameters can be used as reliable measurements of scholarly activity to help determine appointments, promotions and grant allocations, and to assess interventions that promote gender parity.
h-Index Five Years On: Academic Impact Rankings of Neurosurgical Units in the United Kingdom and Ireland
2021, World Neurosurgery
Our aim was to re-evaluate the h-index of neurosurgical units in the United Kingdom and Ireland because it was 5 years since it was last reported.
Using the Web of Science database, we collated cumulative (1950–2020), 10-year (2011–2020), 5-year (2016–2020), and 3-year (2018–2020) data for neurosurgical units in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Data included h-index, number of publications, and average number of citations.
In total, 37 neurosurgical units were found in the United Kingdom and Ireland, which we ranked according to h-index. Since last reviewed 5 years previously, some units had changed their position, whereas others had remained reasonably static. The top 5 units were the same for the 10-year h-index between 2015 and 2020. The 5-year h-index showed some variation in the top 5 compared with the 10-year h-index. We were also able to compare 2 other studies with similar methods but differing from ours.
The h-index for neurosurgical units is the most reliable bibliometric, which shows the academic standing and correlates well with amount of research grant obtained and size of department. It is particularly useful when calculated for the most recent 10-year and 5-year periods. Neurosurgical units change their rankings over time and, therefore, it is important to update the tables periodically. We propose an online database with open access showing all h-index and bibliometric data for neurosurgical units in the United Kingdom and Ireland. This database could provide a live and dynamic report of the academic standings of those units and could be used for grant applications and reviews.
Gender disparity in dermatologic society leadership: A global perspective
2021, International Journal of Women's Dermatology
In the last half-century, there has been increased representation of women in medicine. Despite this increase, there continues to be underrepresentation of women in medical leadership positions. The objective of this study was to investigate the phenomenon of gender disparity in the leadership of professional societies of dermatology worldwide.
Online databases were used to extract the names of global dermatologic societies. Individual society websites were accessed to obtain information on executive members. Data not available on society websites were obtained through internet searches. Scopus was used to obtain H-indexes and other bibliometric outcomes.
Our data collection spanned 92 countries, with 1733 society leaders identified and information available for 1710. In North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and the Middle East, women were in a minority in dermatology professional society leadership. In South America, Central America, and Africa, women were in a slight majority. Across all professional societies, the role of president was more frequently held by men (n = 95) as opposed to women (n = 75). Female leaders were less likely to hold concurrent academic positions as deans/chairpersons/directors (83.33%) than their male counterparts (92.06%). The median H-index of female leaders (9) was lower than that of men (14).
Gender disparity exists in leadership positions in professional dermatology societies. Cultural/continental specific factors should be explored further. Enhancement of institutional support, mentorship, and sponsorship for female dermatologists should be encouraged.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Original investigationIs the h-index Predictive of Greater NIH Funding Success Among Academic Radiologists?

Rationale and Objectives

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Section snippets

Data Selection

Study Population

Discussion

Conclusions

Acad Radiol

Br J Anaesth

Urology

An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

Achievement index climbs the ranks

Nature

The h-index in academic radiology

Acad Radiol

Does the h index have predictive power?

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

Original investigation
Is the h-index Predictive of Greater NIH Funding Success Among Academic Radiologists?