Orthopaedic surgery academic productivity - how do we measure up?

Area of Science:

• Surgical Research Metrics
• Scientometrics in Medicine
• Academic Productivity Analysis

Background:

• Evidence-based surgery relies on robust research.
• Understanding research productivity across surgical fields is crucial for fostering a culture of inquiry.
• The Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) oversees numerous surgical specialties in Australia.

Purpose of the Study:

• To quantitatively assess and compare the academic research productivity of Australian orthopaedic surgeons.
• To benchmark orthopaedic surgical research output against other specialties within the RACS.
• To provide objective data for discussions on research culture and development in surgery.

Main Methods:

• Compiled a list of Australian surgeons registered with the RACS.
• Cross-referenced surgeon data with specialty databases.
• Searched the SCOPUS database for individual h-index, m-index, publishing years, publications, and citations.

Main Results:

• Orthopaedic surgeons exhibited the lowest median h-index (2), shortest research duration (5 years), fewest publications (2), and second-lowest citations (28).
• Despite overall lower metrics, orthopaedic surgeons ranked second when considering the top 10 highest h-index individuals (median 37).

Conclusions:

• Objective data reveals lower research productivity in Australian orthopaedics compared to other surgical specialties.
• Findings can challenge perceptions and inform strategic development for research.
• Regular assessment of academic productivity is recommended for surgical colleges to promote sustained research contributions.