Journal of Pediatric Surgery Article Review: The Disruption Score
With Dr. Mark Davenport & Dr. Ami Shah & Dr. Wynn Sullivan · hosted by Dr. Rod Gerardo & Dr. Ellen Cisco & Dr. Todd Ponsky · StayCurrentMD
Educational content from recorded physician discussions — not medical advice. Talk to your (or your child's) care team about your situation.
Video
Social Determinants of Health Influence on Survival in Wilms Tumor, Neuroblastoma, and Hepatoblastoma
1 min · Published Jan 2026
Video
Update Course Rewind: Staging and Management of Neuroblastoma 2022
Published Jun 2023
Video
The International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) staging system: an INRG Task Force report
59 s · Published Mar 2026
Video
Image-guided core-needle or surgical biopsy for neuroblastoma diagnosis in children
54 s · Published Feb 2024
Video
Dominique Simons, MSc - Best of the Best in Pediatric Surgery 2024
Dr. Todd Ponsky · 7 min · Published Feb 2024
Video
Dr. Yujie Ma - Best of the Best in Pediatric Surgery 2025
Dr. Todd Ponsky · 8 min · Published Mar 2025
Podcast
Journal of Pediatric Surgery Article Review: Q1 (Jan-Mar) 2024
13 min · Published Jun 2024
Podcast
Journal of Pediatric Surgery Article Review: February 2023, BAPS issue
12 min · Published Apr 2023
Podcast
Journal of Pediatric Surgery Article Review: February 2022 BAPS Issue
11 min · Published Apr 2022
Podcast
Biliary Atresia Part II
42 min · Published Feb 2022
Podcast
Biliary Atresia Part I
31 min · Published Jan 2022
Video
Biliary Atresia - Clinical Practice Updates
Published Dec 2020
Video
Pediatric Surgical Oncology Research Collaborative (PSORC): Studying Rare Pediatric Tumors
56 s · Published May 2026
Video
Update Course Rewind 2025: Hirschsprung + ARM: Rare but Real
1 min · Published May 2026
Video
Update Course Rewind 2025: Hirschsprung + ARM: Rare but Real
1 min · Published May 2026
Video
Pooling Patients to Study Rare Pediatric Tumors: An Introduction to PSORC
56 s · Published May 2026
Video
The fetal frontier: A review of current and emerging fetal therapies for genetic diseases
44 s · Published May 2026
Video
Indocyanine green assists with sentinel lymph node mapping in pediatric and adolescent patients
1 min · Published May 2026
What the experts said
The H-index measures the influence or impact of a particular author; the higher it is, the better.
Doctor Holcomb's H-index is 51, reflecting an extensive surgical career of publications.
Doctor Shaw's H-index is 8, which is typical of a fairly average pediatric surgeon.
The disruption score ranges from -1 to +1, with +1 being the most disruptive and -1 being papers that are considered developmental in nature.
The disruption score is calculated as (A minus B) divided by (A plus B plus C), where A is citations that do not include the index paper's references, B is citations that include both the index paper and its references, and C is citations of the references alone without the index paper.
In a worked example, a paper cited 100 times with 90 citations excluding its references, 10 including both, and 20 citing only the references yields a disruption score of 0.66.
The Gauderer-Ponsky paper describing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomies ranked number one on the disruption score list.
Some papers on the top 100 list were obscure, including a case report on fibrous fusion between the liver and lung cited only 17 times that ranked number 7.
Fields with high volumes of developmental research, such as neuroblastoma, had fewer articles on the disruption list compared to innovation-heavy fields like trauma.
The disruption score equation is not an answer for whether a paper goes viral; it measures whether a paper changes the game.
Citation scores remain the key method of assessing the impact of a particular paper.
Young authors and academicians could start putting the disruption score on their CVs to generate interest and visibility.
The article applied a previously described formula for calculating the disruptive score to pediatric surgery papers over several years.
There is a lag time for the disruption score because it is unknown how long it takes to collectively decide that a paper is disruptive.