World Neurosurg
-
Assessing the academic impact and output of scientists and physicians is essential to the academic promotion process and has largely depended on peer review. The inherent subjectivity of peer review, however, has led to an interest to incorporate objective measures into more established methods of academic assessment and promotion. Journal impact factor has been used to add objectivity to the process but this index alone does not capture all aspects of academic impact and achievement. ⋯ This review critically analyzes indices that are currently available to evaluate the academic impact of scientists and physicians. These indices include the total citation count, the total number of papers, the impact factor, as well as the "h" index with eight of its most common variants. The analysis focuses on their use in the field of academic neurosurgery, and discusses means to implement them in current review processes.
-
Most professional organizations now provide patient information material, and not all of this material is appropriate for the average American adult to comprehend. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the United States Department of Health and Human Services recommend that patient education materials be written at the sixth-grade level. Our aim was to assess the readability of neurosurgery-related patient education material and compare it with The American Medical Association, NIH, and United States Department of Health and Human Services recommendations. ⋯ Current patient education material provided by the AANS is written well above the recommended level. Material from the NLM and NIH performed better, but was still above the recommended sixth-grade level. Education materials should contain information relevant to patients' conditions, be accurate in the information they present, and be written with the average patient in mind.