Rank and research: The correlation between integrated plastic surgery program reputation and academic productivity

Background Determinants of residency program reputation are multifactorial and include operative training, academic productivity, and geographic location. However, little is known about these relationships. This study aims to investigate the correlation between academic reputation of integrated plastic surgery programs and the research productivity of their respective full time faculty members. Methods Program rankings were identified from the 2016 Doximity standings and divided into 4 quartiles (Q1-Q4). Full-time faculty and program directors were identified through program websites. Publications by faculty members from 2000 to 2015 were identified through PubMed. Variables collected included affiliated institution, date of publication, authorship position, and journal. Results A total of 67 programs with 607 full-time faculty members were identified. Although not significantly different, program directors had a higher mean number of publications compared with faculty members for Q1, Q2, and Q4. Program departmental chairs had a significantly higher mean number of publications for Q1 and Q2. The Q1 faculty had a significantly higher mean number of publications as compared with Q2, Q3, and Q4. Although all quartiles had similar mean first author publications, Q1 and Q2 had more middle and last author publications. In addition, the higher-ranked programs were more likely to have faculty as middle authors of articles with more contributors. They were also more likely to publish in Plastic Reconstructive Surgery compared with other journals. Conclusions Academic reputation of integrated plastic surgery residency programs is correlated with the scholarly activity of full-time faculty.