Foot and Ankle Fellowship Faculty Research Productivity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Academic productivity within orthopaedic subspecialties is important in developing generalizable knowledge, challenging biases, and evolving practice management. Productivity is linked to academic status and can affect compensation. This study evaluated the research activity of faculty at foot and ankle surgery fellowship programs in the United States and associated Canadian programs. The primary objective was to describe the publishing productivity of American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) fellowship faculty. Methods: Program characteristics from orthopaedic foot and ankle fellowship programs across the United States and Canada were collected from AOFAS and each program’s respective websites. The studied faculty characteristics consisted of years in practice, academic rank, extent of training, and gender. Specific program characteristics were recorded, including Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education approval, academic affiliation, fellow research requirement, number of fellows, number of associated faculty members. Data analysis of faculty productivity (Publications, number of publications in specific journals, number of citations, and Hirsch index [h index]) was gathered using the Scopus database. Results: A total of 48 AOFAS foot and ankle surgery fellowship programs were identified with an associated 185 faculty members. The mean number of publications per faculty member was 44.9 (sd 53.0; range 0-323) with a mean h-index of 11.9 (sd 10.6; range 0-54). One-hundred and forty-four (77.8%) academic-affiliated faculty had a significantly greater number of publications (p<0.01), total citations (p<0.05), and publications in FAI (p<0.05), JBJS (p<0.05), CORR (p<0.05), and JAAOS (p<0.05) compared to the 41 (22.2%) nonacademic faculty. Nonacademic faculty maintained a h-index of 9.5 (95% CI 7-12), while academic faculty had a h-index of 12.6 (95% CI 11-14), which did not meet statistical significance (p=0.062). There were no significant differences between measures of publication productivity in male and female faculty, except for maximum citations in a single paper (67.1 vs 142.3; p<0.05) Conclusion: Academic-affiliated foot and ankle fellowship faculty have higher research productivity than non-academic surgeons. The mean h-index of foot and ankle fellowship faculty was 11.9, which is lower than that reported in sports, joints, and spine fellowship faculty but higher than that reported for hand fellowship faculty. The analyses presented can aid foot and ankle surgeons in assessing their academic productivity. [Table: see text]
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».