Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2023; 84(06): 531-537
DOI: 10.1055/a-1946-5521
Original Article

Posters Presented at North American Skull Base Society 2016–2018: What Factors Influence Their Publication?

S. Daniel Yang 
1   Department of Neurological Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, United States
,
Michelle Seu
2   Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, Illinois, United States
,
James B. Qiao
3   Department of Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, United States
,
John Ta-Hsiang Tsiang
1   Department of Neurological Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, United States
,
Nathan Pecoraro
1   Department of Neurological Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, United States
,
Anand V. Germanwala
1   Department of Neurological Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Research productivity impacts an individual's academic credentials and serves to advance the field of neurosurgery at large. Poster presentations allow researchers to share preliminary results with respected colleagues; however, more critical is the ability to publish peer-reviewed articles. Key factors that lead posters to journal publication are not well understood and difficult to quantify. This study investigates the association between bibliometrics of authors who presented posters at the North American Skull Base Society (NASBS) meeting and odds of journal publication.

Methods Posters from the 2016 to 2018 NASBS archive were reviewed. Hirsch-index (h-index) of first (FH) and senior (SH) authors, research type, research topic, and number of poster authors (nAuthPost) were collected. For posters published as journal articles, number of days from poster presentation to publication (nDays), number of authors in published articles (nAuthArt), and journal impact factor (JIF) were recorded.

Results One-hundred sixty-nine of 481 posters (35.1%) were published as articles. Median FH and SH for published versus unpublished posters were 7 versus 5 (p = 0.01) and 29 versus 19 (p < 0.001), respectively. When adjusted with multivariate regression, only SH (p < 0.001) and nAuthPost (p = 0.001) were significantly associated with odds of publication. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) nDays was 361 (394). Increased authors from poster to article (p = 0.017) and lower FH (p = 0.08) were correlated with increased time to publication. Median (IQR) JIF for all publications was 1.723 (1.068).

Conclusions Bibliometrics such as h-index and number of authors from posters can help objectively characterize and predict future success in research productivity.

Keywords

neurosurgery - publication - conference - h-index - bibliometric - poster - presentation - research

Authors' Contributions

S.D.Y. contributed to original idea, data collection, statistical analysis, and manuscript writing. M.S. gave original idea, helped in data collection, reviewed literature, and wrote manuscript. J.B.Q. helped in data collection, literature review, and manuscript writing. J.T.T. and N.P. helped in manuscript revision. A.V.G. contributed to manuscript key edits, supervision, and project administration.




Publication History

Received: 18 June 2022

Accepted: 13 September 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
17 September 2022

Article published online:
16 November 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Amadio JP, Oyesiku NM. The role of neurosurgery journals in evidence-based neurosurgical care. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2015; 26 (02) 283-294 , x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 National Resident Matching Program. Charting Outcomes in the Match: U.S. Allopathic Seniors. Accessed October 12, 2022 at: https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/charting-outcomes-in-thematch-2018-seniors.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Daniels M, Garzon-Muvdi T, Maxwell R. et al. Preresidency publication number does not predict academic career placement in neurosurgery. World Neurosurg 2017; 101: 350-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rallo MS, Ashraf O, Jumah F, Gupta G, Nanda A. An analysis of cross-continental scholarship requirements during neurosurgical training and national research productivity. Neurosurg Focus 2020; 48 (03) E20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Madhugiri VS, Ambekar S, Strom SF, Nanda A. A technique to identify core journals for neurosurgery using citation scatter analysis and the Bradford distribution across neurosurgery journals. J Neurosurg 2013; 119 (05) 1274-1287
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hauptman JS, Chow DS, Martin NA, Itagaki MW. Research productivity in neurosurgery: trends in globalization, scientific focus, and funding. J Neurosurg 2011; 115 (06) 1262-1272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gnanalingham KK, Tysome J, Martinez-Canca J, Barazi SA. Quality of clinical studies in neurosurgical journals: signs of improvement over three decades. J Neurosurg 2005; 103 (03) 439-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kiehna EN, Starke RM, Pouratian N, Dumont AS. Standards for reporting randomized controlled trials in neurosurgery. J Neurosurg 2011; 114 (02) 280-285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mahajan UV, Wadhwa H, Fatemi P. et al. Does double-blind peer review impact gender authorship trends? An evaluation of two leading neurosurgical journals from 2010 to 2019. J Neurosurg 2021; 135 (02) 352-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Lee J, Kraus KL, Couldwell WT. Use of the h index in neurosurgery. Clinical article. J Neurosurg 2009; 111 (02) 387-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Couldwell WT, Mortimer V, Kraus KL. Expanding neurosurgery. J Neurosurg 2014; 121 (06) 1297-1313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sarkiss CA, Riley KJ, Hernandez CM. et al. Academic productivity of US neurosurgery residents as measured by H-Index: program ranking with correlation to faculty productivity. Neurosurgery 2017; 80 (06) 975-984
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Grech V, Cuschieri S. Write a scientific paper (WASP) - a career-critical skill. Early Hum Dev 2018; 117: 96-97
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Crowley RW, Asthagiri AR, Starke RM, Zusman EE, Chiocca EA, Lonser RR. Research Committee of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. In-training factors predictive of choosing and sustaining a productive academic career path in neurological surgery. Neurosurgery 2012; 70 (04) 1024-1032
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wadhwa H, Shah SS, Shan J. et al. The neurosurgery applicant's “arms race”: analysis of medical student publication in the Neurosurgery Residency Match. J Neurosurg 2019; 133 (06) 1913-1921
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Aoun SG, Bendok BR, Rahme RJ, Dacey Jr RG, Batjer HH. Standardizing the evaluation of scientific and academic performance in neurosurgery–critical review of the “h” index and its variants. World Neurosurg 2013; 80 (05) e85-e90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 MacMaster FP, Swansburg R, Rittenbach K. Academic productivity in psychiatry: benchmarks for the H-Index. Acad Psychiatry 2017; 41 (04) 452-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Babineau M, Fischer C, Volz K, Sanchez LD. Survey of publications and the H-index of Academic Emergency Medicine Professors. West J Emerg Med 2014; 15 (03) 290-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kalcioglu MT, Ileri Y, Ozdamar OI, Yilmaz U, Tekin M. Evaluation of the academic productivity of the top 100 worldwide physicians in the field of otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery using the Google Scholar h-index as the bibliometrics ranking system. J Laryngol Otol 2018; 132 (12) 1097-1101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bastian S, Ippolito JA, Lopez SA, Eloy JA, Beebe KS. The use of the h-index in academic orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (04) e14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Zaorsky NG, O'Brien E, Mardini J, Lehrer EJ, Holliday E, Weisman CS. Publication productivity and academic rank in medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med 2020; 95 (08) 1274-1282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Özcan-Ekşi EE, Canbolat Ç, Ayhan S, Ekşi MŞ. Stronger together in lab: multi-center and laboratory spine studies are closer to publication than single-center and clinical spine studies: snapshot of annual meetings of the Spine Society of Europe. Asian Spine J 2020; 14 (05) 608-612
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Harsh D, Adnan HS, Raees AP, Manjul T, Anil N. How many neurosurgeons does it take to author an article and what are the other factors that impact citations?. World Neurosurg 2021; 146: e993-e1002
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Sayed S. Journal Citation Report 2019-2020. Clarivate Analytics - Journal Impact Factor (ISI). 2020
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Zupanc GK. Impact beyond the impact factor. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol 2014; 200 (02) 113-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ramos MB, Matté Dagostini C, Rabau O. et al. Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the AANS/CNS Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves. J Neurosurg Spine 2020; 33 (06) 854-861
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Patel AJ, Cherian J, Fox BD. et al. Publication patterns of oral and poster presentations at the annual meetings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. J Neurosurg 2011; 115 (06) 1258-1261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ekşi MŞ, Özcan-Ekşi EE. Publication rates of the abstracts presented at the annual meeting of International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery. Childs Nerv Syst 2018; 34 (05) 825-828
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Eksi MS, Kaplan SC, Yilmaz B. et al. Publication rates of presentations at annual scientific meetings of the Turkish Neurosurgical Society. Turk Neurosurg 2017; 27 (01) 142-145
    PubMedGoogle Scholar