Comparative study of journal article scholarly activity: Pharmacy practice dual-degree faculty versus single terminal-degree faculty members

IF 1.3 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY

Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP Pub Date : 2024-03-27 DOI:10.1002/jac5.1947

Rebecca Henkels Pharm.D., Casey Tak Ph.D., Kibum Kim Ph.D., Julia Zhu BS, Pharm.D., Darin Chao Pharm.D., Mark A. Munger Pharm.D., FCCP

{"title":"Comparative study of journal article scholarly activity: Pharmacy practice dual-degree faculty versus single terminal-degree faculty members","authors":"Rebecca Henkels Pharm.D., Casey Tak Ph.D., Kibum Kim Ph.D., Julia Zhu BS, Pharm.D., Darin Chao Pharm.D., Mark A. Munger Pharm.D., FCCP","doi":"10.1002/jac5.1947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The goals of the 2005 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Roadmap of the Future of Pharmacy Colleges emphasized the importance of bidirectional information flow in translational research to enhance drug discovery and research. Many dual-degree programs and pathways have been developed to meet this bidirectional information flow to enhance discovery and research, but limited data exists on the bibliometrics of these dual-degree Department of Pharmacy Practice faculties. To determine whether dual-degree programs enhance research, a four-outcome bibliometric analysis of United States Departments of Pharmacy Practice tenure-track (DPP-TT) dual-degree compared with DPP-TT single terminal-degree faculty was conducted over a 10-year period.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A search of PubMed of DPP-TT single and dual-degree faculty from January 10, 2010 to December 31, 2019 was performed. Faculty employed in DPP-TT were determined through published rosters in the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) rosters or college/school internet sites. Department of Pharmacy Practice faculty members' number of publications, number of citations per publication, <i>h</i>-index, and NIH iCite weighted Relative Citation Ratio (RCR) value were determined. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance compared dual-degree with single terminal-degree DPP faculty data.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Ninety-one institutions employed 348 DPP-TT dual-degree faculty that produced 7480 publications compared with 131 institutions with 1805 single terminal-degree faculty of 12 670 publications. Dual-degree DPP number of citations per publication (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) was 37.8 ± 86.8 with a journal impact factor (JIF) of 6.4 ± 14.3 compared to single-degree of 24.7 ± 90.8 (<i>p</i> < 0.001) with a JIF of 4.7 ± 80.8 (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Dual-degree faculty <i>h</i>-index was 14.7 ± 12.5 with a mean iCite weighted RCR of 54.8 ± 87.6 compared to single-degree faculty of 6.5 ± 8.9 (<i>p</i> < 0.001) with an RCR of 22.1 ± 65.3 (<i>p</i> < 0.001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Department of Pharmacy Practice dual-degree faculty have significantly higher bibliometrics compared with single-degree DPP faculty.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"7 7","pages":"631-636"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jac5.1947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The goals of the 2005 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Roadmap of the Future of Pharmacy Colleges emphasized the importance of bidirectional information flow in translational research to enhance drug discovery and research. Many dual-degree programs and pathways have been developed to meet this bidirectional information flow to enhance discovery and research, but limited data exists on the bibliometrics of these dual-degree Department of Pharmacy Practice faculties. To determine whether dual-degree programs enhance research, a four-outcome bibliometric analysis of United States Departments of Pharmacy Practice tenure-track (DPP-TT) dual-degree compared with DPP-TT single terminal-degree faculty was conducted over a 10-year period.

Methods

A search of PubMed of DPP-TT single and dual-degree faculty from January 10, 2010 to December 31, 2019 was performed. Faculty employed in DPP-TT were determined through published rosters in the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) rosters or college/school internet sites. Department of Pharmacy Practice faculty members' number of publications, number of citations per publication, h-index, and NIH iCite weighted Relative Citation Ratio (RCR) value were determined. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance compared dual-degree with single terminal-degree DPP faculty data.

Results

Ninety-one institutions employed 348 DPP-TT dual-degree faculty that produced 7480 publications compared with 131 institutions with 1805 single terminal-degree faculty of 12 670 publications. Dual-degree DPP number of citations per publication (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) was 37.8 ± 86.8 with a journal impact factor (JIF) of 6.4 ± 14.3 compared to single-degree of 24.7 ± 90.8 (p < 0.001) with a JIF of 4.7 ± 80.8 (p < 0.001). Dual-degree faculty h-index was 14.7 ± 12.5 with a mean iCite weighted RCR of 54.8 ± 87.6 compared to single-degree faculty of 6.5 ± 8.9 (p < 0.001) with an RCR of 22.1 ± 65.3 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Department of Pharmacy Practice dual-degree faculty have significantly higher bibliometrics compared with single-degree DPP faculty.

查看原文本刊更多论文

期刊论文学术活动比较研究：药学实践双学位教师与单终生学位教师的比较研究

2005 年美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）药学院未来路线图的目标强调了转化研究中双向信息流对促进药物发现和研究的重要性。许多双学位项目和途径都是为了满足这种双向信息流以促进发现和研究而开发的，但关于这些双学位药学实践系的文献计量学数据却很有限。为了确定双学位项目是否能提高研究水平，我们对美国药学实践系终身教职（DPP-TT）双学位教师与DPP-TT单终生学位教师进行了为期10年的四项成果文献计量分析。DPP-TT聘用的教师是通过美国药学院协会（AACP）名册或学院/学校互联网站公布的名册确定的。确定了药学实践系教师的论文数量、每篇论文的引用次数、h 指数和 NIH iCite 加权相对引用比 (RCR) 值。91所院校聘用了348名DPP-TT双学位教师，发表了7480篇论文；131所院校聘用了1805名单学位教师，发表了12670篇论文。双学位 DPP 每篇论文的引用次数（平均值 ± 标准差 [SD]）为 37.8 ± 86.8，期刊影响因子 (JIF) 为 6.4 ± 14.3；而单学位 DPP 每篇论文的引用次数为 24.7 ± 90.8（P < 0.001），期刊影响因子 (JIF) 为 4.7 ± 80.8（P < 0.001）。双学位教师的 h 指数为 14.7 ± 12.5，iCite 加权 RCR 平均值为 54.8 ± 87.6，而单学位教师的 h 指数为 6.5 ± 8.9 (p < 0.001)，RCR 平均值为 22.1 ± 65.3 (p < 0.001)。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

0.00%

发文量