Abstract: Institutional Diversity in Academic Plastic Surgery: A Collaborative Solution to Resource Limitations
Year: 2017
Type: conference-abstract
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: The current climate of healthcare reform and research funding restrictions presents new challenges for academic plastic surgery to overcome.1,2 Increasing collaboration with non-academic institutions has been hypothesized as a potential solution, and private industry support has been associated with overall higher citation and publication rates in the general biomedical literature.3 However, it remains unknown whether this is true within plastic surgery. This study seeks to analyze recent publication trends in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS), the leading journal in the field, to evaluate any changes in institutional collaboration over time. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of PRS from 2012–2016 was undertaken, and bibliographic data were retrieved for all original research and discussion articles. Authors’ institutional affiliations were categorized as academic, private, government, or combinations of these (defined here as institutional collaborations). Annual National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding data were also collected over the same time period and inflation-adjusted for 2016 US dollars (USD). Trends over time and correlation between institutional affiliation and NIH funding were analyzed with linear regression modeling, two-sided t-test on the slope parameter, and Pearsons’s r correlation coefficient. RESULTS: In total, 2,595 publications were retrieved from PRS between 2012 and 2016, of which 2,027 (78.1%) originated from academic institutions, 152 (5.9%) from private institutions, 5 (0.2%) from government institutions, 295 (11.4%) from academic-private collaborations and 116 (4.5%) from academic-government collaborations. The proportion of academic-only publications decreased from 82% (in 2012) to 76% (in 2016) of all PRS publications annually, while the proportion of institutional collaborations increased from 10% to 19% over the same time period (p=0.038). Concurrently, NIH funding declined from $33.4 billion in 2012 to a low of $30.7 billion using 2016-adjusted USD, which significant correlated with a decreasing proportion of academic-only publications (p=0.026) and increasing proportion of institutional collaborations (p=0.0053). CONCLUSION: Traditional sources of academic research funding have been restricted during the politically and financially tumultuous recent years. Our study demonstrates that academic plastic surgery has resourcefully navigated this challenging situation by increasing research collaboration with private and government institutions. With no signs of improving access to financial resources from the National Institutes of Health, academic plastic surgeons may consider partnering with other institutions to continue pioneering advances in the field. Reference Citations: 1. Okike K, Kocher MS, Mehlman CT, Bhandari M. Industry-sponsored research. Injury. 2008;39(6):666–680. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2008.02.013. 2. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Congressional Budget Statements. https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/congressional-testimonies. Accessed February 26, 2017. 3. Blumenthal D. Academic-industrial relationships in the life sciences. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(25):2452–2459. doi:10.1056/NEJMhpr035460.
Institutions: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard University
Language: English
Subfield: Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
Field: Decision Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $2,195
OpenAlex ID: W2760539276