Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Academic Ophthalmology 2021; 13(01): e46-e50
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1722743
Research Article

U.S. News & World Report Ophthalmology Hospital Rankings and Research Productivity

John C. Lin
1   Program in Liberal Medical Education, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
2   Section of Ophthalmology, Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island
,
Allison J. Chen
3   Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
,
Ingrid U. Scott
4   Departments of Ophthalmology and Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania
,
Paul B. Greenberg
2   Section of Ophthalmology, Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island
5   Division of Ophthalmology, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
6   Office of Academic Affiliations, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Despite the wide usage of U.S. News & World Report (U.S. News) rankings of ophthalmology hospitals among the public, residency applicants, and ophthalmologists, there is disagreement in the literature on the role of quality of care, research productivity, and other factors in the ranking system. This study investigated the association of U.S. News ranking of ophthalmology hospitals and objective measures of research productivity.

Methods The 2020 U.S. News “Best Hospitals for Ophthalmology” ranking lists 38 hospitals by reputation score and numerically ranks the top 12 institutions. For our analysis, top 12 hospitals were classified as group A and the remaining 26 as group B. The Clinicaltrials.gov, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER), and NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT) were systematically searched for total clinical trials, NIH funding, and the National Eye Institute (NEI) funding for fiscal years 2017, 2018, and 2019. Faculty size and the number of publications by ophthalmology faculty per hospital were recorded from a previous study in 2016.

Results Independent measures of research productivity significantly associated with group A status after multivariate logistic regression analysis were mean faculty Hirsch's index (h-index) over 15 (odds ratio [OR]: 6.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.14–32.94]) and conducting five or more total clinical trials (OR: 8.77, 95% CI: [1.39–55.16]).

Conclusion This study suggests that the reputation-based U.S. News ranking may serve as a proxy for an ophthalmology department's contribution to research measured by mean faculty h-index and number of clinical trials.

Keywords

U.S. News - ophthalmology - academic ranking - research productivity

Disclaimer

The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the U.S. government.




Publication History

Received: 09 September 2020

Accepted: 15 December 2020

Article published online:
30 June 2021

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Olmsted MG, Powell R, Murphy J, Bell D, Morley M, Stanley MUS. Methodology: U.S. News & World Report 2019–20 Best Hospitals: Specialty Rankings. Accessed June 24, 2020 at: https://health.usnews.com/media/best_hospitals/Best_Hospitals_Methodology_2019-20
    Google Scholar
  • 2 U.S. News & World Report. FAQ: How and Why We Rank and Rate Hospitals. Accessed June 5, 2020 at: https://health.usnews.com/health-care/best-hospitals/articles/faq-how-and-why-we-rank-and-rate-hospitals
    Google Scholar
  • 3 McGaghie WC. America's best medical schools: a renewed critique of the u.s. news & world report rankings. Acad Med 2019; 94 (09) 1264-1266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 McGaghie WC, Thompson JA. America's best medical schools: a critique of the U.S. News & World Report rankings. Acad Med 2001; 76 (10) 985-992
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Scherer WJ, Danoff S, Schuman JS. Criteria for evaluating ophthalmology departments based on the U.S. News & World Report ranking system. J Clin Acad Ophthalmol. 2016; 8 (01) e1-e9
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ingram DG, Bachrach BEUS. U.S. News and World Report's rankings of the top 50 children's hospitals for diabetes and endocrinology reflect reputation more than objective measures. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 2011; 24 (9-10): 759-761
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sehgal AR. The role of reputation in U.S. News & World Report's rankings of the top 50 American hospitals. Ann Intern Med 2010; 152 (08) 521-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Bush RA, Quigley EJ, Fox L, Garcia-Bassets I. Role of reputation in top pediatric specialties rankings. Pediatrics 2011; 128 (06) 1168-1172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kutikov A, Rozenfeld B, Egleston BL, Sirohi M, Hwang RW, Uzzo RG. Academic ranking score: a publication-based reproducible metric of thought leadership in urology. Eur Urol 2012; 61 (03) 435-439
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Prasad V, Goldstein JA. US News and World Report cancer hospital rankings: do they reflect measures of research productivity?. PLoS One 2014; 9 (09) e107803
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ayanian JZ, Weissman JS, Chasan-Taber S, Epstein AM. Quality of care for two common illnesses in teaching and nonteaching hospitals. Health Aff (Millwood) 1998; 17 (06) 194-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Selby P, Gillis C, Haward R. Benefits from specialised cancer care. Lancet 1996; 348 (9023): 313-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Yaghoubian A, de Virgilio C, Lee SL. Appendicitis outcomes are better at resident teaching institutions: a multi-institutional analysis. Am J Surg 2010; 200 (06) 810-813 , discussion 813
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Trinh Q-D, Schmitges J, Sun M. et al. Radical prostatectomy at academic versus nonacademic institutions: a population based analysis. J Urol 2011; 186 (05) 1849-1854
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Jacob BA, Lefgren L. The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. J Public Econ 2011; 95 (9,10): 1168-1177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005; 102 (46) 16569-16572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Thiessen CR, Venable GT, Ridenhour NC, Kerr NC. Publication productivity for academic ophthalmologists and academic ophthalmology departments in the United States: an analytical report. J Clin Acad Ophthalmol. 2016; 8: e19-e29
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Birks Y, Fairhurst C, Bloor K, Campbell M, Baird W, Torgerson D. Use of the h-index to measure the quality of the output of health services researchers. J Health Serv Res Policy 2014; 19 (02) 102-109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Roskoski Jr. R. Ranking Tables of NIH Funding to U.S. Medical Schools. Accessed June 26, 2020 at: http://www.brimr.org/NIH_Awards/NIH_Awards.htm
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Svider PF, Lopez SA, Husain Q, Bhagat N, Eloy JA, Langer PD. The association between scholarly impact and National Institutes of Health funding in ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2014; 121 (01) 423-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 R Core Team. The R project for statistical computing. Accessed June 24, 2020 at: https://www.R-project.org/
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Saint S, Christakis DA, Saha S. et al. Journal reading habits of internists. J Gen Intern Med 2000; 15 (12) 881-884
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Tenopir C, King DW, Clarke MT, Na K, Zhou X. Journal reading patterns and preferences of pediatricians. J Med Libr Assoc 2007; 95 (01) 56-63
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Holmes EW, Burks TF, Dzau V. et al. Measuring contributions to the research mission of medical schools. Acad Med 2000; 75 (03) 303-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Tarquinio GT, Dittus RS, Byrne DW, Kaiser A, Neilson EG. Effects of performance-based compensation and faculty track on the clinical activity, research portfolio, and teaching mission of a large academic department of medicine. Acad Med 2003; 78 (07) 690-701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ramsey PG, Miller ED. A single mission for academic medicine: improving health. JAMA 2009; 301 (14) 1475-1476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kreiner G. The slavery of the h-index-measuring the unmeasurable. Front Hum Neurosci 2016; 10: 556
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Costas R, Bordons M. The h-index: advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. J Informetrics 2007; 1 (03) 193-203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar