Scholarly Productivity in U.S. Academic Musculoskeletal Radiology Faculty: Clinical Track Versus Tenure/Research...

Area of Science:

• Radiology
• Academic Medicine
• Bibliometrics

Background:

• Clinical and tenure/research tracks in U.S. academic radiology have distinct scholarship expectations.
• Understanding bibliometric productivity differences is crucial for faculty evaluation and career development.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare bibliometric productivity (publications, citations, h-index) between clinical-track and tenure/research-track musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology faculty across academic ranks.
• To identify factors influencing bibliometric output in academic radiology.

Main Methods:

• Cross-sectional bibliometric study of U.S. academic MSK radiology faculty.
• Data sourced from ACGME directory and MSK fellowship lists.
• Academic rank and career track assigned from institutional titles; academic age calculated from first publication.

Main Results:

• Clinical-track assistant professors demonstrated higher publications, citations, and h-index than their tenure/research counterparts.
• No significant track differences observed for associate professors.
• Tenure/research full professors had higher publication counts and a borderline higher h-index than clinical-track full professors.
• Academic age and rank explained nearly all bibliometric variability (97-99%), with track and sex contributing minimally.

Conclusions:

• Bibliometric productivity differences between tracks are rank-dependent.
• Academic age and rank are the primary drivers of bibliometric output in academic radiology.
• Faculty track has a minimal impact on overall bibliometric performance when accounting for age and rank.