Evaluation of the Relative Citation Ratio, a New National Institutes of Health-Supported Bibliometric Measure of Research Productivity, among Academic Radiation Oncologists

Calvin B. Rock, Arpan V. Prabhu, C. David Fuller, Charles Thomas, Emma B. Holliday

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Publication metrics are useful in evaluating academic faculty for awarding grants, recruitment, and promotion. A new metric, the relative citation ratio (RCR), was recently released by the National Institutes of Health (NIH); however, no benchmark data yet exist. We sought to create benchmark data for physician faculty in academic radiation oncology (RO) and analyze correlations associated with increased academic productivity. Methods: Citation database searches were performed for all US radiation oncologists affiliated with academic RO programs. Gender, NIH funding, career duration, academic rank, RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each faculty. RCR and weighted RCR were calculated and compared between each subgroup of interest. RCR percentiles were also created for reference. Results: A total of 1,299 RO physician faculty members from 75 institutions were included in the analysis. Overall, RO physician were very productive and influential with a mean RCR of 1.57 ± 1.53 SD and median RCR (interquartile range) of 1.32 (0.87-1.94). Academic rank, career duration, and NIH funding were associated with increased mean RCR and weighted RCR. Male gender and having a PhD were associated with an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR. Conclusions: Current academic radiation oncologists have a high mean RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1 with professor or chair and previous NIH funding having the highest RCR and weighted RCR values overall. These data may be useful for self-evaluation of ROs as well as evaluation of faculty by institutional and departmental leaders.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of the American College of Radiology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Bibliometrics
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Radiation Oncology
Benchmarking
Research
Physicians
Diagnostic Self Evaluation
Organized Financing
Publications
Radiation Oncologists
Databases

Keywords

  • Bibliometrics
  • Citations
  • Productivity
  • Radiation oncology
  • Relative citation ratio

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{459234c764e544c4be65de93d7aa217e,
title = "Evaluation of the Relative Citation Ratio, a New National Institutes of Health-Supported Bibliometric Measure of Research Productivity, among Academic Radiation Oncologists",
abstract = "Purpose: Publication metrics are useful in evaluating academic faculty for awarding grants, recruitment, and promotion. A new metric, the relative citation ratio (RCR), was recently released by the National Institutes of Health (NIH); however, no benchmark data yet exist. We sought to create benchmark data for physician faculty in academic radiation oncology (RO) and analyze correlations associated with increased academic productivity. Methods: Citation database searches were performed for all US radiation oncologists affiliated with academic RO programs. Gender, NIH funding, career duration, academic rank, RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each faculty. RCR and weighted RCR were calculated and compared between each subgroup of interest. RCR percentiles were also created for reference. Results: A total of 1,299 RO physician faculty members from 75 institutions were included in the analysis. Overall, RO physician were very productive and influential with a mean RCR of 1.57 ± 1.53 SD and median RCR (interquartile range) of 1.32 (0.87-1.94). Academic rank, career duration, and NIH funding were associated with increased mean RCR and weighted RCR. Male gender and having a PhD were associated with an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR. Conclusions: Current academic radiation oncologists have a high mean RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1 with professor or chair and previous NIH funding having the highest RCR and weighted RCR values overall. These data may be useful for self-evaluation of ROs as well as evaluation of faculty by institutional and departmental leaders.",
keywords = "Bibliometrics, Citations, Productivity, Radiation oncology, Relative citation ratio",
author = "Rock, {Calvin B.} and Prabhu, {Arpan V.} and Fuller, {C. David} and Charles Thomas and Holliday, {Emma B.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.006",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Radiology",
issn = "1558-349X",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of the Relative Citation Ratio, a New National Institutes of Health-Supported Bibliometric Measure of Research Productivity, among Academic Radiation Oncologists

AU - Rock, Calvin B.

AU - Prabhu, Arpan V.

AU - Fuller, C. David

AU - Thomas, Charles

AU - Holliday, Emma B.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Publication metrics are useful in evaluating academic faculty for awarding grants, recruitment, and promotion. A new metric, the relative citation ratio (RCR), was recently released by the National Institutes of Health (NIH); however, no benchmark data yet exist. We sought to create benchmark data for physician faculty in academic radiation oncology (RO) and analyze correlations associated with increased academic productivity. Methods: Citation database searches were performed for all US radiation oncologists affiliated with academic RO programs. Gender, NIH funding, career duration, academic rank, RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each faculty. RCR and weighted RCR were calculated and compared between each subgroup of interest. RCR percentiles were also created for reference. Results: A total of 1,299 RO physician faculty members from 75 institutions were included in the analysis. Overall, RO physician were very productive and influential with a mean RCR of 1.57 ± 1.53 SD and median RCR (interquartile range) of 1.32 (0.87-1.94). Academic rank, career duration, and NIH funding were associated with increased mean RCR and weighted RCR. Male gender and having a PhD were associated with an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR. Conclusions: Current academic radiation oncologists have a high mean RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1 with professor or chair and previous NIH funding having the highest RCR and weighted RCR values overall. These data may be useful for self-evaluation of ROs as well as evaluation of faculty by institutional and departmental leaders.

AB - Purpose: Publication metrics are useful in evaluating academic faculty for awarding grants, recruitment, and promotion. A new metric, the relative citation ratio (RCR), was recently released by the National Institutes of Health (NIH); however, no benchmark data yet exist. We sought to create benchmark data for physician faculty in academic radiation oncology (RO) and analyze correlations associated with increased academic productivity. Methods: Citation database searches were performed for all US radiation oncologists affiliated with academic RO programs. Gender, NIH funding, career duration, academic rank, RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each faculty. RCR and weighted RCR were calculated and compared between each subgroup of interest. RCR percentiles were also created for reference. Results: A total of 1,299 RO physician faculty members from 75 institutions were included in the analysis. Overall, RO physician were very productive and influential with a mean RCR of 1.57 ± 1.53 SD and median RCR (interquartile range) of 1.32 (0.87-1.94). Academic rank, career duration, and NIH funding were associated with increased mean RCR and weighted RCR. Male gender and having a PhD were associated with an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR. Conclusions: Current academic radiation oncologists have a high mean RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1 with professor or chair and previous NIH funding having the highest RCR and weighted RCR values overall. These data may be useful for self-evaluation of ROs as well as evaluation of faculty by institutional and departmental leaders.

KW - Bibliometrics

KW - Citations

KW - Productivity

KW - Radiation oncology

KW - Relative citation ratio

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85039786800&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85039786800&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.006

M3 - Article

C2 - 29301726

AN - SCOPUS:85039786800

JO - Journal of the American College of Radiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Radiology

SN - 1558-349X

ER -