Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Academic Ophthalmology 2023; 15(01): e41-e45
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1761277
Research Article

The Scholarly Impact of Student Authorship in Ophthalmology

Minali Prasad 
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Munizay Paracha
2   Department of Internal Medicine, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Deniz Goodman
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Howard J. Cabral
3   Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Stephen P. Christiansen 
4   Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Manju L. Subramanian
4   Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose The H-index (Hi), an author-level metric of scholarly impact, is predictive of future scientific achievement. We sought to analyze the scholarly impact of student authorship on the Hi of corresponding authors (CAs) within a major academic journal in the specialty of ophthalmology.

Materials and Methods We compared the Hi of all unique CAs for manuscripts published in Ophthalmology (Journal of the American Academy of Ophthalmology) in 2008, 2012, and 2016. Data abstraction was completed twice: in October 2018 and March 2021. We further grouped published articles for CAs into those with student authors (StA) and those without (nStA). Primary analysis involved a linear regression analysis with change in Hi from October 2018 to March 2021 as the outcome variable, CA groups as the predictor variable, adjusting for the covariates of baseline Hi, the year when the CA published his or her article, number of research items published in October 2018, and the academic appointment of the CAs. Secondary analysis involved a linear regression analysis with change in Hi from October 2018 to March 2021 as the outcome variable, total number of student authors per CA as the predictor variable, adjusting for the covariates of baseline Hi, the year CA published his or her article, number of research items published in October 2018, and the academic appointment of the CAs.

Results The number of student authors increased from 168 in 2008 to 192 in 2016. Of the 902 articles, 316 articles were co-authored by one or more student authors. The average change in Hi of CAs publishing with student authors (StA, 11.0 ± 14.7) was significantly greater (p < 0.0001) than the change in Hi of CAs publishing without student authors (nStA, 6.2 ± 6.2). As the total number of student authors increased, the change in Hi of CAs increased linearly for all years combined (regression coefficient = 1.70, p-value < 0.0001).

Conclusion CAs publishing with students in the field of ophthalmology have a higher scholarly impact than those publishing without students. The development of programs to integrate students into ophthalmology research early on may encourage their pursuit of a career in ophthalmology, while advancing the careers of their mentors.

Keywords

H-index - student author - mentor - ophthalmology


Publication History

Received: 29 July 2022

Accepted: 14 December 2022

Article published online:
28 January 2023

© 2023. 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 Match SF. Ophthalmology residency match. Accessed November 25, 2022 at: https://aupo.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/Feb%202022%20Oph%20Residency%20Match%20General%20Stats%20final.pdf
    PubMed
  • 2 Cohn MR, Bigach SD, Bernstein DN. et al; Collaborative Orthopaedic Educational Research Group. Resident selection in the wake of United States Medical Licensing examination step 1 transition to pass/fail scoring. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2020; 28 (21) 865-873
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Fan RR, Aziz F, Wittgen CM, Williams MS, Smeds MR. A survey of vascular surgery program directors: perspectives following USMLE step 1 conversion to pass/fail and virtual only interviews. Ann Vasc Surg 2023; 88: 32-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lin LO, Makhoul AT, Hackenberger PN. et al. Implications of pass/fail step 1 scoring: plastic surgery program director and applicant perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020; 8 (12) e3266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Raborn LN, Janis JE. Current views on the new United States medical licensing examination step 1 pass/fail format: a review of the literature. J Surg Res 2022; 274: 31-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 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
  • 7 Hirsch JE. Does the H index have predictive power?. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007; 104 (49) 19193-19198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Scopus. (n.d.). Accessed October 2018 and March 2021 at: https://www.scopus.com/
    PubMed
  • 9 Svider PF, Husain Q, Mauro KM, Folbe AJ, Baredes S, Eloy JA. Impact of mentoring medical students on scholarly productivity. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2014; 4 (02) 138-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Paracha M, Hirsch AE, Tseng JF, McAneny DB, Sachs TE. Scholarly impact of student authorship on surgical research. Am J Surg 2019; 217 (01) 175-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Paracha M, Kim KN, Qureshi MM. et al. Scholarly impact of student participation in radiation oncology research. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 101 (04) 779-783
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kan CK, Qureshi MM, Paracha M, Sachs TE, Sarfaty S, Hirsch AE. Effect of medical student contributions on academic productivity: analysis of student authorship over time. Adv Med Educ Pract 2021; 12: 481-489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chole RA, Ogden MA. Predictors of future success in otolaryngology residency applicants. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 138 (08) 707-712
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Seaburg LA, Wang AT, West CP. et al. Associations between resident physicians' publications and clinical performance during residency training. BMC Med Educ 2016; 16: 22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Laskowitz DT, Drucker RP, Parsonnet J, Cross PC, Gesundheit N. Engaging students in dedicated research and scholarship during medical school: the long-term experiences at Duke and Stanford. Acad Med 2010; 85 (03) 419-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kozar RA, Lucci A, Miller CC. et al. Brief intervention by surgeons can influence students toward a career in surgery. J Surg Res 2003; 111 (01) 166-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Noble J. Factors influencing career choice in ophthalmology. Can J Ophthalmol 2006; 41 (05) 596-599
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Siemens DR, Punnen S, Wong J, Kanji N. A survey on the attitudes towards research in medical school. BMC Med Educ 2010; 10: 4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Griffin MF, Hindocha S. Publication practices of medical students at British medical schools: experience, attitudes and barriers to publish. Med Teach 2011; 33 (01) e1-e8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Keller TE, Collier PJ, Blakeslee JE, Logan K, McCracken K, Morris C. Early career mentoring for translational researchers: mentee perspectives on challenges and issues. Teach Learn Med 2014; 26 (03) 211-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Jacobs CD, Cross PC. The value of medical student research: the experience at Stanford University School of Medicine. Med Educ 1995; 29 (05) 342-346
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Zier K, Friedman E, Smith L. Supportive programs increase medical students' research interest and productivity. J Investig Med 2006; 54 (04) 201-207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Mottow-Lippa L. Ophthalmology in the medical school curriculum: reestablishing our value and effecting change. Ophthalmology 2009; 116 (07) 1235-1236 , 1236.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Shah M, Knoch D, Waxman E. The state of ophthalmology medical student education in the United States and Canada, 2012 through 2013. Ophthalmology 2014; 121 (06) 1160-1163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lippa LM, Boker J, Duke A, Amin A. A novel 3-year longitudinal pilot study of medical students' acquisition and retention of screening eye examination skills. Ophthalmology 2006; 113 (01) 133-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Buckley LM, Sanders K, Shih M, Hampton CL. Attitudes of clinical faculty about career progress, career success and recognition, and commitment to academic medicine. Results of a survey. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160 (17) 2625-2629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Beasley BW, Simon SD, Wright SM. A time to be promoted: the prospective study of promotion in academia (prospective study of promotion in academia). J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21 (02) 123-129
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gershoni A, Vainer I, Reitblat O. et al. Research productivity across different ophthalmic subspecialties in the United States. BMC Health Serv Res 2019; 19 (01) 778
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Accessed April 9, 2021 at: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ophthalmology
    PubMed