An analysis of bibliometric indicators, National Institutes of Health funding, and faculty size at Association of American Medical Colleges medical schools, 1997-2007.
Saved in:
| Title: | An analysis of bibliometric indicators, National Institutes of Health funding, and faculty size at Association of American Medical Colleges medical schools, 1997-2007. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Hendrix, Dean1 dhendrix@buffalo.edu |
| Source: | Journal of the Medical Library Association. Oct2008, Vol. 96 Issue 4, p324-334. 11p. 5 Charts. |
| Subjects: | Medical research evaluation, Bibliometrics, Medical school faculty, Educational productivity, Research grants, Federal aid to medical research, Association of American Medical Colleges |
| Geographic Terms: | United States |
| Abstract: | Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze bibliometric data from ISI, National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funding data, and faculty size information for Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) member schools during 1997 to 2007 to assess research productivity and impact. Methods: This study gathered and synthesized 10 metrics for almost all AAMC medical schools (n5123): (1) total number of published articles per medical school, (2) total number of citations to published articles per medical school, (3) average number of citations per article, (4) institutional impact indices, (5) institutional percentages of articles with zero citations, (6) annual average number of faculty per medical school, (7) total amount of NIH funding per medical school, (8) average amount of NIH grant money awarded per faculty member, (9) average number of articles per faculty member, and (10) average number of citations per faculty member. Using principal components analysis, the author calculated the relationships between measures, if they existed. Results: Principal components analysis revealed 3 major clusters of variables that accounted for 91% of the total variance: (1) institutional research productivity, (2) research influence or impact, and (3) individual faculty research productivity. Depending on the variables in each cluster, medical school research may be appropriately evaluated in a more nuanced way. Significant correlations exist between extracted factors, indicating an interrelatedness of all variables. Total NIH funding may relate more strongly to the quality of the research than the quantity of the research. The elimination of medical schools with outliers in 1 or more indicators (n520) altered the analysis considerably. Conclusions: Though popular, ordinal rankings cannot adequately describe the multidimensional nature of a medical school's research productivity and impact. This study provides statistics that can be used in conjunction with other sound methodologies to provide a more authentic view of a medical school's research. The large variance of the collected data suggests that refining bibliometric data by discipline, peer groups, or journal information may provide a more precise assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of the Medical Library Association is the property of University of Pittsburgh, University Library System and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 35974518 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: An analysis of bibliometric indicators, National Institutes of Health funding, and faculty size at Association of American Medical Colleges medical schools, 1997-2007. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hendrix%2C+Dean%22">Hendrix, Dean</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><i> dhendrix@buffalo.edu</i> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+the+Medical+Library+Association%22">Journal of the Medical Library Association</searchLink>. Oct2008, Vol. 96 Issue 4, p324-334. 11p. 5 Charts. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+research+evaluation%22">Medical research evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bibliometrics%22">Bibliometrics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+school+faculty%22">Medical school faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+productivity%22">Educational productivity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+grants%22">Research grants</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+aid+to+medical+research%22">Federal aid to medical research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Association+of+American+Medical+Colleges%22">Association of American Medical Colleges</searchLink> – Name: SubjectGeographic Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+States%22">United States</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze bibliometric data from ISI, National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funding data, and faculty size information for Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) member schools during 1997 to 2007 to assess research productivity and impact. Methods: This study gathered and synthesized 10 metrics for almost all AAMC medical schools (n5123): (1) total number of published articles per medical school, (2) total number of citations to published articles per medical school, (3) average number of citations per article, (4) institutional impact indices, (5) institutional percentages of articles with zero citations, (6) annual average number of faculty per medical school, (7) total amount of NIH funding per medical school, (8) average amount of NIH grant money awarded per faculty member, (9) average number of articles per faculty member, and (10) average number of citations per faculty member. Using principal components analysis, the author calculated the relationships between measures, if they existed. Results: Principal components analysis revealed 3 major clusters of variables that accounted for 91% of the total variance: (1) institutional research productivity, (2) research influence or impact, and (3) individual faculty research productivity. Depending on the variables in each cluster, medical school research may be appropriately evaluated in a more nuanced way. Significant correlations exist between extracted factors, indicating an interrelatedness of all variables. Total NIH funding may relate more strongly to the quality of the research than the quantity of the research. The elimination of medical schools with outliers in 1 or more indicators (n520) altered the analysis considerably. Conclusions: Though popular, ordinal rankings cannot adequately describe the multidimensional nature of a medical school's research productivity and impact. This study provides statistics that can be used in conjunction with other sound methodologies to provide a more authentic view of a medical school's research. The large variance of the collected data suggests that refining bibliometric data by discipline, peer groups, or journal information may provide a more precise assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of the Medical Library Association is the property of University of Pittsburgh, University Library System and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=35974518 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.3163/1536-5050.96.4.007 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 11 StartPage: 324 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Medical research evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Bibliometrics Type: general – SubjectFull: Medical school faculty Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational productivity Type: general – SubjectFull: Research grants Type: general – SubjectFull: Federal aid to medical research Type: general – SubjectFull: Association of American Medical Colleges Type: general – SubjectFull: United States Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: An analysis of bibliometric indicators, National Institutes of Health funding, and faculty size at Association of American Medical Colleges medical schools, 1997-2007. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Hendrix, Dean IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct2008 Type: published Y: 2008 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 15365050 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 96 – Type: issue Value: 4 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of the Medical Library Association Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
