Is Industry Funding Associated with Greater Scholarly Impact Among Academic Neurosurgeons?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between industry payments and scholarly impact among academic neurosurgeons.

METHODS: Faculty names and academic rank data were obtained from department websites, bibliometric data were obtained from the Scopus database, and industry payment data were obtained from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services open payments database (openpayments.cms.gov). The h-index was used to estimate scholarly impact. Payments were classified as "general," "associated research," and "research payments." Subgroup analyses were done for academic rank, fellowship training, and sex.

RESULTS: Among 1008 academic neurosurgeons, scholarly impact was greater among individuals receiving associated research industry support compared with those not receiving it. Scholarly impact also was greater among individuals who received more than $10,000 of any type of industry support compared with individuals who received less than that or no payment. This association also was seen in fellowship-trained surgeons. Female neurosurgeons were less likely than male neurosurgeons to get industry funding and were likely to get less funding.

CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong association between associated research funding from industry and scholarly impact among academic neurosurgeons. It's unclear whether this association is a result of funding facilitating more research projects that eventually lead to more high-impact publications, if industry is providing more funding to academic neurosurgeons with greater scholarly impact, or whether it represents intrinsic academic activity among a group of neurosurgeons who are more likely to be academically productive and procure funding from all potential sources to increase this activity.