ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2021
The relative citation ratio and the h-index among academic ophthalmologists: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Productivity and Impact in Foot and Ankle Surgery: Insights From Relative Citation Ratio Analysis of Recent Fellowship Graduates.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024Article
- Use of the Relative Citation Ratio in Conjunction With H-Index to Promote Equity in Academic Orthopaedics.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2023Article
- The Relative Citation Ratio: Evaluating a New Measure of Scientific Influence Among Academic Sports Medicine Surgeons.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2023Article
- The Relative Citation Ratio: A Modern Approach to Assessing Academic Productivity within Plastic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the National Institutes of Health-supported relative citation ratio among American orthopedic spine surgery faculty: A new bibliometric measure of scientific influence.North American Spine Society journal · 2022Article
- Article
- Retainment of U.S. Orthopaedic Surgeons in Academia from 2016 to 2022.JB & JS open accessArticle
- Descriptive Analysis of Vitreoretinal Surgery Fellowship Program Directors.Journal of vitreoretinal diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimited research has evaluated the relative citation ratio (RCR), a novel measure of research productivity. Accordingly, there remains a minimal understanding of its practical value relative to established metrics such as the h-index. Here, we examined correlations between the mean and weighted RCR scores and the h-index and explore the influence of academic rank, career duration, PhD acquisition, and fellowship training on these metrics.
methodsData regarding the academic rank (e.g. assistant professor, associate professor, professor, or "other"), career duration, degrees, fellowship training, and research yield were collected for 1018 academic ophthalmologists practicing in the southern United States of America. The iCite and Scopus databases were utilized to quantify research yield via calculations of mean and weighted RCR, and h-index, respectively.
resultsSignificant correlations were observed between the h-index and the mean (ρ = 0.62,
conclusionThe findings suggest that the RCR is an effective measure of research yield, while resolving deficiencies present in the h-index. Further research remains to characterize the RCR's value relative to other established markers of research productivity.
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.