Assessing National Institutes of Health funding and scholarly impact in neurological surgery

TLDR

Research productivity is increasingly important in academic neurological surgery and can be measured through publications, bibliometrics, and external grant support. The study aimed to assess whether a faculty member’s h index predicts receipt of National Institutes of Health funding in neurosurgery departments. The authors examined NIH awardees from 2011‑2013, categorizing them by rank, degree, and Scopus‑derived h index, and compared these data with a random sample of non‑funded faculty from 15 departments. Higher h indices were strongly associated with NIH funding, with funded faculty averaging 23.6 versus 10.8 for non‑funded, and h index rose with academic rank, funding amount, and was higher for MDs than PhDs, indicating that the h index may aid academic promotion decisions.

Abstract

Research productivity is increasingly important in academic neurological surgery and can be measured through a variety of methods, such as publications, objective bibliometrics, and securing external grant support. The authors' objectives were to determine whether there is an association between scholarly impact, as measured by the h index, and successful National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant funding awarded to faculty in neurological surgery departments.Primary investigators receiving National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards from Fiscal Years 2011-2013 were organized by academic rank, terminal degree, and their h index, as calculated from the Scopus database. These data were also obtained for nonfunded faculty from 15 randomly selected departments for comparison, and the average h index for each group was calculated.National Institutes of Health-funded faculty had higher average h indices than their nonfunded colleagues (23.6 vs 10.8, p < 0.0001), a finding that persisted upon controlling for academic rank. The mean h index increased with successive academic rank in both cohorts; greater funding totals were seen with successive academic position (Kruskal-Wallis, p < 0.05). National Institutes of Health-funded MDs had higher h indices than their PhD colleagues (p = 0.04), although funding levels did not differ significantly. There was a trend of increasing h index with higher NIH-funding ranges (p < 0.05).The authors' findings demonstrate a strong relationship between scholarly impact and securing NIH funding among faculty in academic neurosurgical departments. Faculty receiving a greater amount of funding tended to have a higher h index. Mean scholarly impact, as measured by the h index, increased with successive academic rank among both NIH-funded and nonfunded faculty, suggesting that this bibliometric may have utility as an adjunct in the academic appointment and promotion process in academic neurological surgery.