Commentary on: Aesthetic Surgery Research Funding: Where Does It Come From and to Whom Does It Go?

Abstract Background Recent data show that aesthetic surgery research is lagging in comparison to reconstructive surgery: research funding and institutional disparities within aesthetic surgery are potential factors in this trend. Objectives To determine if disparities exist in aesthetic surgery research based on funding sources or practice settings. Methods Aesthetic Surgery Journal articles from 2009-2019 were reviewed. Chi-square, t-test, bivariate and multivariate regression analyses evaluated research trends. Results A total of 2,262 publications were identified, with 318 funded articles meeting inclusion criteria. Majority of studies (294, 92%) received external funding, with 281 (88%) being supported solely by external funds. Externally funded studies were financed by private industry (194, 66%), foundations/societies (53, 18%), government grants (23, 8%), or a combination of agencies (24, 8%). Majority of funded studies were at academic institutions (266, 84%), followed by private practice (46, 14%) and private industry (6, 2%). Analysis of annual publications revealed a rising percentage of academic-based research, which correlated with decreasing research from private practice (r= -0.95, r 2= 0.89, P<0.001). Compared to academic institutions, private practice relied more heavily on industry funding (55% vs. 87% respectively, P=0.001), exhibiting lower rates of foundational/societal (20% vs. 2%), governmental (9% vs. 0%), combined (8% vs. 7%), and internal department funding (8% vs. 4%). Article citations and level of evidence were unaffected by funding source, agency, or practice setting. Conclusions Lack of diversity in research funding among private practice surgeons may explain the reported discrepancies that currently exist between aesthetic and reconstructive surgery research.

Download Full-text

Has the Quality of Aesthetic Surgery Research Improved over the Last 20 Years?

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00266-017-0915-y ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 41 (6) ◽

pp. 1473-1474 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

C. M. Sugrue ◽

R. M. Sugrue ◽

J. L. Kelly

Keyword(s):

Aesthetic Surgery ◽

Surgery Research

Download Full-text

The Role of Social Media in Disseminating Plastic Surgery Research: The Relationship between Citations, Altmetrics and Article Characteristics

10.1101/2020.08.26.20182337 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Michael C Grant ◽

Ryckie G Wade ◽

Kai R Scott-Bridge

Keyword(s):

Social Media ◽

Plastic Surgery ◽

Negative Binomial ◽

Evidence Synthesis ◽

Negative Binomial Regression ◽

Aesthetic Surgery ◽

Global Scale ◽

Surgery Research ◽

Media Channels ◽

The Relationship

Background: Social media (SoMe) enables publishers and authors to disseminate content immediately and directly to interested end-users, on a global scale. Alternative metrics (altmetrics) are non-traditional bibliometrics which describe the exposure and impact of an article on freely available platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia and the news. Altmetrics are strongly associated with ultimate citation counts in various medical disciplines, except plastic surgery which represents the rational for this study. Methods: Altmetric explorer was used to extract altmetrics and citation rates for articles published during 2018 in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS), the Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, the Annals of Plastics Surgery and Plastic Surgery (also known as Chirurgie Plastique). Multivariable negative binomial regression was used to estimate the relationship between citations and predictors (presented as the incidence rate ratio, IRR with 95% confidence interval, CI). Results: Overall, 1215 plastic surgery articles were captured which were cited 3269 times. There was a strong and independent association between the number of mentions in SoMe and the number of times an article was cited (adjusted IRR 1.01 [95% CI 1.01, 1.1]), whereby each mention in SoMe (e.g. Tweets or Facebook posts) translated to one additional citation. Evidence synthesis articles (e.g. systematic reviews) were cited twice as often as other articles and again, the use of SoMe to advertise these outputs was independently associated with more citations (IRR 2.0 [95% CI 1.3, 3.2]). Conclusions: Dissemination of plastic surgery research through social media channels increases an articles impact as measured by citations.

Download Full-text

1023 The Role of Social Media in Disseminating Plastic Surgery Research: The Relationship Between Citations, Altmetrics and Article Characteristics

British Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1093/bjs/znab134.346 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

M Grant ◽

K Scott-Bridge ◽

R Wade

Keyword(s):

Social Media ◽

Plastic Surgery ◽

Negative Binomial ◽

Negative Binomial Regression ◽

Aesthetic Surgery ◽

Binomial Regression ◽

Surgery Research ◽

Medical Disciplines ◽

The Relationship

Abstract Background Social media (SoMe) enable the dissemination of content immediately and directly to interested end-users. Alternative metrics (altmetrics) are non-traditional bibliometrics which describe the exposure and impact of an article on freely available platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. Altmetrics within days of publication are associated with ultimate citation counts in various medical disciplines, except plastic surgery which represents the rationale for this study. Method Altmetric explorer was used to extract altmetrics and citation rates for articles published during 2018 in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS), the Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, the Annals of Plastics Surgery and Plastic Surgery. Multivariable negative binomial regression was used to estimate the relationship between citations and predictors (presented as the incidence rate ratio, IRR with 95% confidence interval, CI). Results Overall, 1215 articles were captured. On average, articles published in PRS were cited nearly five times as often as articles published elsewhere (adjusted IRR 4.77 [95% CI 2.36, 9.62]). Overall, SoMe mentions were positively associated with citation rates (adjusted IRR 1.01 [95% CI 1.01, 1.1]); marginal analysis showed that 45 mentions translated to one extra citation. Conclusions Dissemination of plastic surgery research through SoMe channels are associated with significant improvements in short term citations rates.

Download Full-text