ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2020
Do Departments in a College of Medicine Differ in Academic Productivity As Assessed by the H-Indices of Tenured Faculty Members?
Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is uncertain how different academic medical departments differ in academic productivity as assessed by commonly used bibliometric measures, eg, the h-index (the maximum value of h such that an author has published h papers that have each been cited at least h times).
aimThis project examined whether departments in the University of Iowa's Carver College of Medicine differed in h-indices of tenured faculty members.
methodsBased on 2020 data obtained from the College (and other University sources), the author compiled three data sets of Scopus h-indices of tenured faculty members identified by department, varying in size due to slightly different inclusion criteria (N's=334, 341, and 354). Analyses compared h-indices between ranks and among departments.
resultsIn the basic data set (N=334), h-indices of the 230 (69%) full and 104 (31%) associate professors differed based on a t-test, means (standard deviations)=37 (17) and 20 (7), respectively, p<0.0001. For both full and associate professors separately, departments differed in h-indices based on analyses of variance, p=0.04 and p=0.02, respectively. In the expanded data sets, departmental differences were significant for full and associate professors (with N=341) and full professors (with N=354).
conclusionDepartments differed in academic productivity of tenured faculty members as assessed by h-indices. This was not a powerful, monolithic effect, ie, relative departmental standings for full and associate professors were not consistent, and departmental differences for associate professors were nonsignificant in the largest (N=354) data set. Multiple factors probably contributed to departmental differences and should be further investigated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.