ArticleNeurosurgery practice2026
Beyond Publication Counts: Trends in Neurosurgical Publishing via a Retrospective Analysis of the Arms Race Control Score.
Article in Neurosurgery practice, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesResearch productivity has become increasingly emphasized in neurosurgery residency applications, and applicant publication counts continue to rise. The Arms Race Control Score (ARCS) was proposed to standardize research effort, but its temporal stability and predictive value for future output remain unclear. Among board-certified US neurosurgeons, we sought to retrospectively examine how the ARCS has evolved temporally across 20 residency cohorts (1995-2014) and evaluate the predictive value of the ARCS on postresidency research productivity.
methodsPublication data for neurosurgeons certified by the American Board of Neurological Surgery between 2009 and 2024 were extracted from Scopus. Leveraging large-language model analysis of Scopus's document type, title, journal, and abstract, publications were categorized based on ARCS criteria. For each surgeon, ARCS was calculated at the time of residency start. Distributions were analyzed across 5-year residency cohorts. Correlations and multivariable regressions tested associations between ARCS and long-term outputs (postresidency publication total, citation total, and h-index), adjusting for years since residency graduation and pre-residency publication count.
resultsThis cohort included 1776 board-certified neurosurgeons who began residency between 1995 and 2014 and had a total of 96 249 publications. ARCS steadily increased over time (
conclusionIn a retrospective cohort, ARCS moderately increased in more recent residency cohorts and is a modest, independent predictor of long-term research productivity. These findings support ARCS as a complementary metric-alongside holistic review-for interpreting applicant research beyond raw counts.
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.