RESUMEN
Background: Objective measures of research influence are being increasingly utilized to evaluate and compare academic faculty. However, traditional bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index and article citation count, are biased by time-dependent factors and are limited by a lack of field normalization. The relative citation ratio (RCR) is a new field- and time-normalized article-level metric developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the RCR among fellowship-trained academic sports medicine surgeons and to analyze physician factors associated with RCR values. We hypothesized that the mean RCR score for fellowship-trained academic sports medicine surgery faculty will fall above the NIH standard. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A retrospective data analysis was performed using the iCite database for all fellowship-trained sports medicine surgery faculty associated with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs in December 2021. In eligible faculty, the mean RCR, weighted RCR, and total publication count were compared by sex, career duration, academic rank, and presence of additional degrees. A mean RCR value of 1.0 is the NIH-funded field-normalized standard. The data herein are presented as the median and interquartile range, in addition to the mean and standard deviation, to account for outliers of the mean and weighted RCR scores. Results: A total of 624 fellowship-trained sports medicine surgery faculty members from 160 orthopaedic surgery residency programs were included in the analysis. Overall, faculty produced impactful research, with a median RCR of 1.6 (interquartile range, 1.0-2.2) and a median weighted RCR of 19.3 (interquartile range, 5.1-69.3). Advanced academic rank and career longevity were associated with increased weighted RCR and total publication count. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value >1.0. Conclusion: Study findings indicate that fellowship-trained academic sports medicine surgery faculty are highly productive and produce impactful research, as evidenced by the high median RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1.0.
RESUMEN
Background: Publication metrics have been traditionally used to compare research productivity amongst academic faculty. However, traditional bibliometrics lack field-normalization and are often biased towards time-dependent publication factors. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has developed a new, field-normalized, article-level metric, known as the "relative citation ratio" (RCR), that can be used to make accurate self, departmental, and cross-specialty comparisons of research productivity. This study evaluates the use of the RCR amongst academic orthopedic spine surgery faculty and analyzes physician factors associated with RCR values. Methods: A retrospective data analysis was performed using the iCite database for all fellowship trained orthopedic spine surgery (OSS) faculty associated with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopedic surgery residency program. Mean RCR, weighted RCR, and total publication count were compared by sex, career duration, academic rank, and presence of additional degrees. A value of 1.0 is the NIH-funded field-normalized standard. Student t-tests were used for two-group analyses whereas the analysis of variance tests (ANOVA) was used for between-group comparisons of three or more subgroups. Statistical significance was achieved at P < 0.05. Results: A total of 502 academic OSS faculty members from 159 institutions were included in the analysis. Overall, OSS faculty were highly productive, with a median RCR of 1.62 (IQR 1.38-2.32) and a median weighted RCR of 68.98 (IQR 21.06-212.70). Advancing academic rank was associated with weighted RCR, career longevity was associated with mean RCR score, and male sex was associated with having increased mean and weighted RCR scores. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1.0. Conclusions: Academic orthopedic spine surgery faculty produce impactful research as evidenced by the high median RCR relative to the standard value set by the NIH of 1.0. Our data can be used to evaluate research productivity in the orthopedic spine community.
RESUMEN
Background: It is critical for orthopedic surgery residents and residency programs to have a current understanding of the content and resources utilized by the Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE) to continuously guide study and educational efforts. This study presents an updated analysis of the shoulder and elbow section of the OITE. Methods: All OITE questions, answers, and references from 2013 to 2019 were reviewed. The number of shoulder and elbow questions per year was recorded, and questions were analyzed for topic, imaging modalities, cognitive taxonomy, and references. We compared our data to the results of a previous study that analyzed shoulder and elbow OITE questions from 2002 to 2007 to examine trends and changes in this domain overtime. Results: There were 177 shoulder and elbow questions (126 shoulder, 71.2%; 51 elbow, 28.8%) of 1863 OITE questions (9.5%) over a 7-year period. The most commonly tested topics included degenerative joint disease/stiffness/arthroplasty (31.6%), anatomy/biomechanics (16.9%), instability/athletic injury (15.3%), trauma (14.7%), and rotator cuff (13.6%). Half of all questions involved clinical management decisions (49.7%). A total of 417 references were cited from 56 different sources, the most common of which were the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (23.3%), Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (20.4%), and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume) (16%). The average time lag from article publication to OITE reference was 7.7 years. Compared with a prior analysis from 2002 to 2007, there was a significant increase in the number of shoulder and elbow questions on the OITE (5.5% to 9.5%; P < .001). Recent exams incorporated more complex multistep treatment questions (4.4% vs. 49.7%; P < .001) and fewer recall questions (42.2% vs. 22%; P < .001). There was a significant increase in the use of imaging modalities (53.3% vs. 79.1%; P < .001). No significant differences in the distribution of question topics were found. Conclusions: The percentage of shoulder and elbow questions on the OITE has nearly doubled over the past decade with greater emphasis on critical thinking (eg, clinical management decisions) over recall of facts. These findings should prompt educators to direct didactic efforts (eg, morning conferences and journal club) toward case-based learning to foster critical thinking and clinical reasoning skills.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate orthopaedic surgery resident case volume and variability for adult and pediatric knee arthroscopy from 2016 to 2020. METHODS: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education surgical case log data from 2016 to 2020 for graduating United States orthopaedic surgery residents were analyzed. The average number of total (adult and pediatric), adult, and pediatric knee arthroscopy cases were compared from 2016 to 2020. The 10th and 90th percentiles of case volumes for adult and pediatric knee arthroscopy procedures were compared from 2016 to 2020 to determine caseload variability. RESULTS: There was an 18% increase in pediatric knee arthroscopy cases between 2016 and 2020 (average: 13.9 ± 10 to 16.4 ± 13; P < .005), a 5.4% decrease in adult knee arthroscopy cases (100 ± 45 to 94.6 ± 47; P < .027), and a 2.6% decrease in total knee arthroscopy (113.9 ± 47 to 111 ± 51; P = .264) cases. There was an 11-fold difference in the number of pediatric knee arthroscopy cases performed between the 10th and 90th percentile of residents in 2020 (3 vs 33 cases, respectively), a 3.28-fold difference for adult knee arthroscopy (47 vs 154, respectively), and a 2.98-fold difference for total knee arthroscopy (59 vs 176, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric knee arthroscopy comprises a small yet growing percentage of total knee arthroscopy case volume of graduating orthopaedic surgery residents. However, wide variability in resident exposure is present and likely masked by the abundance of adult cases performed each year. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings presented in this study may assist in optimizing arthroscopy resident education. Existing ACL reconstruction and knee arthroscopy case minimum requirements could be updated to include a set number of pediatric cases. These changes might help reduce case volume variability and discrepancies in resident education.
