A Correlation Between National Institutes of Health Funding and Bibliometrics in Neurosurgery

ObjectiveThe relationship between metrics, such as the h-index, and the ability of researchers to generate funding has not been previously investigated in neurosurgery. This study was performed to determine whether a correlation exists between bibliometrics and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding data among academic neurosurgeons.MethodsThe h-index, m-quotient, g-index, and contemporary h-index were determined for 1225 academic neurosurgeons from 99 (of 101) departments. Two databases were used to create the citation profiles, Google Scholar and Scopus. The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports tool was accessed to obtain career grant funding amount, grant number, year of first grant award, and calendar year of grant funding.ResultsOf the 1225 academic neurosurgeons, 182 (15%) had at least 1 grant with a fully reported NIH award profile. Bibliometric indices were all significantly higher for those with NIH funding compared to those without NIH funding (P < .001). The contemporary h-index was found to be significantly predictive of NIH funding (P < .001). All bibliometric indices were significantly associated with the total number of grants, total award amount, year of first grant, and duration of grants in calendar years (bivariate correlation, P < .001) except for the association of m-quotient with year of first grant (P = .184).ConclusionsBibliometric indices are higher for those with NIH funding compared to those without, but only the contemporary h-index was shown to be predictive of NIH funding. Among neurosurgeons with NIH funding, higher bibliometric scores were associated with greater total amount of funding, number of grants, duration of grants, and earlier acquisition of their first grant.