A time to be promoted. The Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia (Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia)

Gender equity in academic dermatology: Problems aplenty, yet paths ahead

Efforts to achieve gender equity of health professionals should be a priority in all fields of medicine, including academic dermatology. This review aimed, first, to summarize available evidence about the status of gender equity in various domains of academic dermatology-headship positions, salary, editor and editorial board appointments, publications, conference presentations, receipt of research grants and academic prizes-second, to identify challenges to achieving gender equity and, third, to articulate the components of a multifaceted strategy for gender parity. A variety of databases were searched. Manual searching of reference lists and searching of grey literature were also undertaken. It was found that, despite improvements in some domains, the gender inequity persists in all of the above-mentioned areas of academic dermatology. Challenges to achieve gender parity include time in pregnancy, disproportionate participation in childrearing and domestic tasks compared with men, suboptimal legislation in many jurisdictions for parenting and childcare leave, and unconscious biases about women. Elements of a multipronged approach include strengthening women's dermatology societies that advocate for women in academia; celebrating the careers of distinguished female academic dermatologists; mentoring; promoting leadership courses; striving for a greater representation of women among editors-in-chief, authors, and conference presenters, among others; seeking better pay, leave conditions and other work entitlements; conducting high-quality research about gender inequity in academic dermatology; imposing sanctions for violations of gender equity; supporting dermatologists' health; and learning from the experience of other fields of academic medicine.

Counternarratives that illuminate faculty agency: A five-year longitudinal qualitative study of physician educators in academic medicine

PURPOSE

Physician educators are often expected to direct educational programs and assume roles that conform to field norms for career advancement but that may not afford meaningful work for educators. The purpose of this study was to describe and analyse the perspectives and actions taken by physician educators in response to tension between feeling compelled to direct an educational program and doing educationally meaningful work.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used data from a longitudinal study and focused on three participants who, over the course of the five-year study, offered significant insights into how physician educators act in ways that run counter to expectations for career advancement. Our narrative analysis entailed organizing data from interview transcripts into time-ordered displays, weaving data into counternarratives that were edited by participants, and using the theory of faculty agency (and its key constructs, strategic perspectives and strategic action) to thread the stories together.

RESULTS

In each counternarrative, the participant deliberated their sense of being a physician educator (strategic perspectives) and when expectations became untenable, they did what they needed to do to engage in meaningful work (strategic action) rather than comply with expectations for career advancement in academic medicine. For one participant, faculty agency meant leaving academic medicine; for another, it meant reducing clinical time so that unpaid time could be devoted to education; and for another, it meant opting not do direct a reputable education program.

CONCLUSIONS

Faculty agency is a useful theoretical lens for conceptualizing how physician educators navigate their careers in academic medicine. Counternarratives that illuminate faculty agency offer stories that describe alternate career paths and portend a different future for physician educators.

Unveiling the gender gap in research: a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most-cited articles on food-borne pathogen outbreaks from 1990 to 2020

Introduction

Despite a recent increase in the representation of female authors in scientific literature, a significant gap persists concerning the inclusion of women in research. This necessitates the analysis of published literature from a gender perspective. This study aimed to provide gender distribution in authorship in the 100 most-cited articles on food-borne pathogen outbreaks from 1990 to 2020.

Methods

Bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Scopus database. Two reviewers were selected to search the database. We included the 100 most-cited articles on foodborne outbreak investigations. The analysis was conducted using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 and Microsoft Excel version 2016. The citation data, including total citations, citations per year, and representation of women as first and senior authors, was analyzed in terms of frequencies, mean, median, and interquartile range. The correlation between journal impact factor and the representation of women in high-impact factor journals was determined. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Most of the top-cited articles were published between 2001 and 2010 (n=47). The top 3 most-cited articles were from the USA. Of the total 100 articles, women were the first and last authors in 46% and 28% of the articles, respectively, reflecting a significant gender gap. However, the proportion of females as principal investigators gradually increased from 25% (n=10/30) to 52% (n=24/47) during the period 2001-2010 and to 92% (n=12/13) during 2011-2020. The USA had the highest number of included articles (n=48), and women were principal authors in 56% (n=27) of them. The lowest representation of women was observed in Austria, Denmark, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Portugal, and the United Kingdom.

Conclusion

Women are under-represented in published literature on food-borne pathogen outbreaks. Although the representation of women as principal authors has recently increased, disparities still exist at the senior-author level, calling for women's advancement in academic science.

Pursuing Scholarship: Creating Effective Conference Submissions

Medical educators are expected to disseminate peer-reviewed scholarly work for academic promotion and tenure. However, developing submissions for presentations at national meetings can be confusing and sometimes overwhelming. Awareness and use of some best practices can demystify the process and maximize opportunities for acceptance for a variety of potential submission categories. This article outlines logistical steps and best practices for each stage of the conference submission process that faculty should consider when preparing submissions. These include topic choice, team composition, consideration of different submission types, and strategies for effectively engaging participants.

Preparing Hematology/Oncology Fellows for Success: Implementing an Annual Career Development and Research Retreat

Multiple factors, including job satisfaction, personality traits, and training experiences, influence the career trajectory of hematology/oncology fellows. In an effort to expose hematology/oncology fellows to (1) the various careers in oncology, (2) a diverse group of speakers for future mentorship, and (3) research opportunities, and grant writing experience, we established an annual career development and research retreat. During the retreat, we engaged speakers who covered a range of career trajectories, including academic, private practice, industry, government, and administrative paths. We introduced clinicians and researchers with a track record of providing top-notch mentorship to fellows with aligning interests and detailed research opportunities and grant writing. The sessions were led by senior fellows, and we adopted an in-person and virtual hybrid model to allow speakers from various institutions to participate. Feedback from participants, as gathered through surveys, indicated positive responses: all respondents reported that this retreat was "extremely" or "very helpful," and a majority expressed their intent to pursue academic careers. The curriculum and structure of this retreat may help to inform the development of fellowship career development and research retreats at other institutions.

Educator's blueprint: A guide for clinician-educators to achieve promotion in emergency medicine

Promotion and tenure (P&T) can be a complex process, which many junior faculty in academic emergency medicine may struggle navigating. This paper presents perspectives and key considerations to guide faculty through the promotions process. We explore tips through three key phases: plotting the course for a successful academic career, collecting data to support academic advancement, and packaging materials into a compelling application portfolio. This resource can inform faculty and faculty developers when planning for P&T.

Promotion Committees and Attending Meetings Improve Promotion Rates for Early Career Faculty

INTRODUCTION

Academic promotion is an important goal in an academic physician's career trajectory. Understanding the factors that influence success in academic promotion is important in providing appropriate guidance and resources.

METHODS

The Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) conducted a large omnibus survey of family medicine department chairs. Participants were asked about recent promotion rates within their department, as well as about whether their department had a promotion committee, whether faculty regularly met with the chair regarding preparation for promotion, whether faculty had been assigned mentors, and whether faculty attended national academic meetings.

RESULTS

The response rate was 54%. Most chairs were male (66.3%), White (77.9%), and aged 50 to 59 (41.3%) or 60 to 69 (42.3%) years. Attendance at professional meetings was associated with a higher rate of assistant-to-associate professor promotions. Departments with a committee to help faculty with promotions had higher rates of promotion for both assistant-to-associate and associate-to-full professor levels than departments without a committee. Promotion was not associated with assigned mentorship, support from the chair, departmental or institutional sponsorship of faculty development regarding promotion, or annual assessments of progress toward promotion.

CONCLUSIONS

Attendance at professional meetings and the presence of a departmental promotions committee may be helpful factors in achieving academic promotion. An assigned mentor was not found to be a helpful factor.

Mission Critical: Reimagining Promotion for Clinician-Educators

Academic clinician-educators who teach health professions trainees and lead educational programs have been penalized by the mismatch between their daily contributions to the academic mission and traditional promotion criteria focused on peer-reviewed publications and external reputation. Despite two decades of incremental approaches, inconsistency and inequity persist in the promotion process for clinician-educators. The authors propose five steps to mark a new approach to academic advancement for clinician-educators: (1) elevate the scholarly approach to teaching over peer-reviewed publications; (2) allow clinician-educators to identify an area of focus; (3) broaden the evidence for educational excellence; (4) prioritize internal referees; and (5) increase clinician-educator representation on promotion committees. Achieving meaningful change requires transforming entrenched traditions and policies at multiple levels. Changes that advance equity are necessary to retain academic faculty members who train the next generation of health professionals.

Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors Moderate Associations between Work Stress and Exhaustion: Testing the Job Demands-Resources Model in Academic Staff at an Austrian Medical University

The time-intensive work of publishing in scientific journals is an important indicator of job performance that is given much weight during promotion procedures for academic positions. The current study applied the job demands–resources model and analyzed whether family supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB) moderated associations between work stress and feelings of exhaustion as a job resource and whether feelings of exhaustion ultimately mediated the link between work stress and academic employees’ publication activity. The current online cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted in 133 academic employees (65.4% women, 34.6% men; M_age = 41.9, SD = 10.1) at an Austrian medical university and assessed employees’ numbers of publications, H-index, work stress, feelings of exhaustion, FSSB, and work–family services used. Manifest path models revealed that FSSB moderated the link between experiencing high levels of work stress and strong feelings of exhaustion, especially in employees who had at least one child below the age of 18. Part-time employment was most strongly linked with lower numbers of publications and lower H-index levels. The finding that FSSB acted as a job resource mostly for employees with at least one child below 18 underlines the fact that FSSB is different from other forms of supervisor support. The current study supports recommendations to increase the amount of work–family services and to change organizational norms to be supportive of the successful management of family and work obligations.

Attributes of excellent clinician teachers and barriers to recognizing and rewarding clinician teachers' performances and achievements: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Over the last 31 years, there have been several institutional efforts to better recognize and reward clinician teachers. However, the perception of inadequate recognition and rewards by clinician teachers for their clinical teaching performance and achievements remains. The objective of this narrative review is two-fold: deepen understanding of the attributes of excellent clinician teachers considered for recognition and reward decisions and identify the barriers clinician teachers face in receiving recognition and rewards.

METHODS

We searched OVID Medline, Embase, Education Source and Web of Science to identify relevant papers published between 1990 and 2020. After screening for eligibility, we conducted a content analysis of the findings from 43 relevant papers to identify key trends and issues in the literature.

RESULTS

We found the majority of relevant papers from the US context, a paucity of relevant papers from the Canadian context, and a declining international focus on the attributes of excellent clinician teachers and barriers to the recognition and rewarding of clinician teachers since 2010. 'Provides feedback', 'excellent communication skills', 'good supervision', and 'organizational skills' were common cognitive attributes considered for recognition and rewards. 'Stimulates', 'passionate and enthusiastic', and 'creates supportive environment', were common non-cognitive attributes considered for recognition and rewards. The devaluation of teaching, unclear criteria, and unreliable metrics were the main barriers to the recognition and rewarding of clinician teachers.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of our narrative review highlight a need for local empirical research on recognition and reward issues to better inform local, context-specific reforms to policies and practices.

Gender Disparity in Academic Gastroenterology: Beginning of the End of the Underrepresentation of Women?

BACKGROUND

Though there are an increasing number of female medical graduates, women remain underrepresented in academic medicine. There have been several reasons to explain this gender disparity, including marital status, number of children, number of hours worked, job flexibility, perceptions of women as inferior leaders, gender bias, sexual harassment, and unsupportive academic climates.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between scholarly productivity and the representation of female gastroenterologists in academia. Specifically, scholarly productivity measured by the h-index and academic rank were explored to determine if there were gender disparities in academic productivity and rank in gastroenterology.

METHODS

Gastroenterology departmental listings were obtained from the Fellowship and Residency Interactive Database of the American Medical Association. The Scopus database was used to record each physician's h-index. Statistical analyses were conducted with Wilcoxon rank-sum test, which compared matched samples by academic rank, and ANOVA tests, which compared multiple academic ranks.

RESULTS

Out of 1703 academic gastroenterologists, women account for 25% of academic physicians. Women have statistically lower h-indices at the level of Assistant Professor (p = 0.0012), and at the level of Chair (p = 0.01). There was no difference in h-indices between male and female at the rank of Associate Professor and Professor.

CONCLUSIONS

While these results mirror patterns appreciated in other fields of medicine, the results at the rank of Chair may suggest that despite the lower h-index compared to their male counterparts, females are perceived as having strong inherent leadership skills outside of academic productivity that are also conducive to leading a department and may be contributing to their rise to Chair.

Trends in gender of authors of original research in oncology among major medical journals: a retrospective bibliometric study

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the temporal trend in gender ratios of first and last authors in the field of oncological research published in major general medical and oncology journals and examined the gender pattern in coauthorship.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective study in PubMed using the R package RISmed. We retrieved original research articles published in four general medical journals and six oncology specialty journals. These journals were selected based on their impact factors and popularity among oncologists. We identified the names of first and last authors from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2019. The gender of the authors was identified and validated using the Gender API database (https://gender-api.com/).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The percentages of first and last authors by gender and the gender ratios (male to female) and temporal trends in gender ratios of first and last authors were determined.

RESULTS

We identified 34 624 research articles, in which 32 452 had the gender of both first and last authors identified. Among these 11 650 (33.6%) had women as the first author and 7908 (22.8%) as the last author, respectively. The proportion of female first and last authors increased from 26.6% and 16.2% in 2002, to 32.9% and 27.5% in 2019, respectively. However, the gender ratio (male to female) of first and last authors decreased by 1.5% and 2.6% per year, respectively, which were statistically significant (first author: incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.00; last author: IRR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). Male first and last authorship was the most common combination. Male-female and female-female pairs increased by 2.0% and 5.0%, respectively (IRR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03 and IRR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The continued under-representation of women means that more efforts to address parity for advancement of women in academic oncology are needed.

Gender in authorship and editorship in medical education journals: A bibliometric review

CONTEXT

Gender bias has been observed in the authorship and editorship of academic literature in varied medical specialties. This is important as peer-reviewed publications, and participation on editorial boards, are closely related to academic productivity and advancement. The aim of this paper was to examine whether gender-based disparities in authorship and editorship exist in leading medical education journals.

METHODS

A retrospective bibliometric review was conducted of articles published at eight different time-points across a 49-year time period (specifically: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2019) in four leading medical education journals (Academic Medicine, BMC Medical Education, Medical Education and Medical Teacher). First and last (as a proxy for senior) author gender was determined for each article, along with the gender of the 2019 editorial board members of each journal. Chi-square tests for trend were conducted to examine variations in author gender distributions over time, and binomial tests of proportions were conducted to examine gender distributions in authorship and editorship in 2019. Logistic regression analyses were carried out to determine factors that predicted the odds of authorship by women.

RESULTS

A total of 5749 articles were included. A significant trend of increased women as first and last authors was observed across all journals. The percentage of women first authors increased from 6.6% in 1970 to 53.7% in 2019 (P < .001), and women last authors increased from 9.5% in 1970 to 46% in 2019 (P < .001). Overall, the distributions of women first authors, last authors and editorial board members in 2019 indicated greater gender parity than many other fields of medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive progress towards gender parity has been made in medical education scholarship. However, future research and efforts are needed to ensure the continued participation, and highlighting, of women in medical education scholarship and to address other factors which may hinder academic advancement for women in this field.

Effect of Medical Student Contributions on Academic Productivity: Analysis of Student Authorship Over Time

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the trend of student authorship is crucial in determining its correlation to scholarly impact for corresponding authors. Our objective is to investigate student authorship rates over time in articles published in JAMA Internal Medicine (IM), as well as to examine potential effects student authors have on scholarly impact scores of corresponding authors via H-index measures.

METHODS

Authorship data including student authors (SA), first student authors, and corresponding authors (CA) from prior JAMA IM publications between 2010 and 2018 were collected, with a total of 701 studies. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent sample t-tests were performed to assess for differences in the mean by publishing year and student authorship, respectively.

RESULTS

Of 4591 total authors, 683 (14.9%) were considered student authors. The percentage of student authorship increased from 46.3% to 58.0% between 2010 and 2018, respectively. No difference in average H-indices of CA between SA and non-SA groups (overall NSA H_i mean: 30.2, vs SA H_i mean: 32.1, p=0.371) was noted.

DISCUSSION

Student participation in research is not a disadvantage to scholarly impact for corresponding authors. Increased student authorship reflects a promising trend towards greater student participation in research within the field of medicine.

Scholarship in Teaching: An Approach to Enhancing the Value and Academic Standing of Teaching

BACKGROUND

In our effort to increase the value and academic standing of teaching, we implemented an initiative focused on scholarship in teaching. Our program was narrowly focused, project-based, peer-reviewed, resource-neutral, and open to all faculty. Faculty members are invited annually to submit a description of their educational projects in keeping with Glassick's criteria. Our purpose was to assess the effects of this award program.

METHOD

We reviewed the distribution of applications over a 3-year period and determined the academic departments, academic rank of applicants, and focus of projects. A questionnaire assessed applicants' perceptions of the value of participation, its contribution to promotion and advancement, and its role in subsequent dissemination activities.

RESULTS

Slightly fewer than half (60 of 124, 48%) of the applications submitted during 2016 through 2018 were judged by peer review to meet Glassick's criteria for scholarship and received the award. Most applicants were junior faculty, and most applications were from the department of medicine though all departments who taught students in core clinical rotations were represented during the years studied. The projects that were awarded were more likely to be disseminated when compared with those who were not awarded.

LESSONS LEARNED

Our scholarship in teaching program seemingly advanced educational scholarship among teaching faculty and provided a way of recognizing projects that advanced educational initiatives. Further efforts are required to promote support from departmental leadership, to enhance faculty participation, and to encourage success through mentoring and assistance in project preparation.

Gender Issues in Academic Hospital Medicine: a National Survey of Hospitalist Leaders

BACKGROUND

Gender inequities are documented in academic medicine. Within General Internal Medicine (GIM), there are fewer female division directors and first and last authors on publications. With gender parity in US medical school graduates and with Academic Hospital (AH) medicine being a relatively newer discipline, one might postulate that AH would have less gender inequity.

DESIGN

A national survey of AH programs was developed via literature review and expert recommendations. Domains included program and faculty information. Gender of the leader was determined via website or telephone call.

PARTICIPANTS

Leaders of AH programs associated with the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). Programs without a primary teaching hospital or hospitalist program and those not staffed by university-affiliated physicians were excluded.

MAIN MEASURES

Description and characteristics of leaders and programs including a multivariable analysis of gender of hospitalist leaders and the portion of female faculty.

KEY RESULTS

59% response rate (80 of 135); there were no differences between responders/non-responders in NIH funding (p = 0.12), type of institution (p = 0.09), geographic region (p = 0.15), or year established (p = 0.86). Reported number of female and male faculty were approximately equal. 80% of hospitalist leaders were male; 37% of male hospitalist leaders were professors, no female leaders were professors. In univariate and multivariate analysis only the number of hospitals staffed was a significant predictor of having a female hospitalist leader. There were no significant predictors of having fewer female faculty.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated gender inequality in academic hospital medicine regarding leadership and rank. Though there was equal gender distribution of faculty, among leaders most were men and all "full professors" were men. As diversity benefits the tripartite mission research on methods, initiatives and programs that achieve gender equity in leadership are needed.

Gender differences in academic rank among faculty surgeons at US veterinary schools in 2019

OBJECTIVE

To describe academic rank, gender, surgical career length, and publication record of academic veterinary surgeons and to estimate the association between gender and higher academic rank.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SAMPLE

Residency-trained surgeons at US veterinary schools in 2019.

METHODS

Surgeons were identified via institutional websites. Data including surgeon gender, academic title, and year of board certification were collected from public resources. Publication record was measured by using author h-indices obtained from Scopus. Data were analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighteen surgeons were identified from 30 institutions, including 162 (51%) women and 156 (49%) men. Women represented 66% of instructors and assistant professors, and men represented 60% of associate and full professors. This distribution differed significantly (P < .001). Author h-index was associated with career length but not gender. Men were 2.5 times more likely than women to be associate or full professors (odds ratio 2.52, 95% CI 1.03-6.14, P = .042) after adjustment for career length and h-index.

CONCLUSION

Female surgery faculty at US veterinary schools in 2019 were concentrated in lower academic ranks and were less likely than male surgery faculty to be associate or full professors after adjustment for career length and publication record.

IMPACT

A gender gap exists in academic veterinary surgery in the United States. It is critical to recognize that women's increasing participation in veterinary medicine has not been matched by equal representation in all areas. Additional efforts are warranted to identify contributing factors and implement strategies to improve gender inclusion.

The proportion of male and female editors in women's health journals: A critical analysis and review of the sex gap. Int J Womens Dermatol 2020;6:7-12. [PMID: 32025554 PMCID: PMC6997826 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijwd.2019.11.005]

BACKGROUND

Historically, women have been underrepresented in leadership positions in medicine. The reasons for this are multifactorial. In recent years, women's representation in medicine has improved. However, inequities in the proportion of men and women in medical leadership remain, especially with regard to editorial journal boards.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore current trends of women in leadership positions on journal editorial boards.

METHODS

A comprehensive search for women's health journals was performed in collaboration with university librarians in February 2019 using EMBASE, Scopus, SciFinder, and MEDLINE records for journals with relevance to women's health. Each journal was e-mailed to verify the accuracy of the journal editorial boards listed on their respective webpages. Five categories, as well as the totals for each journal, were analyzed for the proportion of women versus men: editor-in-chief, associate editor, deputy editor, and section editor, and other.

RESULTS

Women comprised the minority of positions on women's health editorial boards. Of the total 1440 board members included, 602 members (42%) were women and 838 members (58%) were men. Women occupied 54 of 132 editor-in-chief positions (41%), 257 of 596 associate editor positions (43%), 13 of 42 deputy editor positions (30%), 46 of 120 section editor positions (38%), and 232 of 549 other editor positions (42%).

CONCLUSION

Although the sex gap in leadership in medicine is improving, it is still present. Our findings suggest that women are underrepresented as editors at most levels in women's health journals centered on topics such as reproductive health, obstetrics and gynecology, perinatology, gynecological oncology, and breastfeeding. With sponsorship/mentorship for women, flexible scheduling, and considerate thought in leadership appointment, this sex gap will continue to improve.

Gender Differences in Research Productivity among Academic Psychiatrists in Canada

OBJECTIVES

Gender inequity in academic medicine persists despite increases in the number of women physicians. We sought to explore gender differences in research productivity for academic psychiatrists in Canada.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study of the 3379 psychiatrists in all 17 university departments of psychiatry in Canada, research productivity, as measured by the h-index and number of publications, was compared between women and men using a negative log binomial regression model to generate relative rates (RRs), adjusted for career duration (aRR). Findings were stratified by academic rank, institution region, and institution size. A subanalysis of those with 10 or more publications was conducted as a proxy for identifying physicians on a research track.

RESULTS

Women (43% of the sample) had a lower mean (standard deviation) h-index than men (2.87 [6.49] vs. 5.31 [11.1]; aRR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 0.72). Differences were significant only for junior faculty and not for associate and full professors. Comparison by number of publications followed a similar pattern (aRR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.55). Among those with 10 or more publications (n = 721), differences between men and women were smaller than in the overall cohort for both the h-index (aRR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.87) and number of publications (aRR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

Gender differences in research productivity at the national level in academic psychiatry in Canada support a call to adopt a more systematic approach to promoting equitable opportunities for women in research, especially in early career, to improve diversity and enhance future psychiatric research and discovery.

Orthopaedic Academic Activity in the United States: Bibliometric Analysis of Publications by City and State

Background:

The purpose of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis of orthopaedic academic output in the United States.

Methods:

Publications based on city and state origin, corrected for population size, median household income, total number of surgeons, and the number of various subspecialties were evaluated. The 15 highest-ranked orthopaedic journals were audited from 2010 to 2014 and then subdivided into anatomic regions and 14 subspecialties.

Results:

A total of 8,100 articles were published during the study period. Most originated from New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Minnesota. New York published the greatest number by city, followed by Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, and Rochester. When adjusted for the number of publications per city, surgeons per population, publications per surgeon population, publications per population, and publications per median income per capita, Vail and New York led in two and Stanford in one of the metrics.

Conclusions:

New York was the leader for the total publications, greatest activity within subspecialties, and publications per surgeon/population and per median income/capita. Vail was the leader for publications/surgeon and population. The top four cities of New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago were responsible for 28% of the academic output over the 5-year study period.

Influences for Gender Disparity in Academic Neuroradiology

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There has been extensive interest in promoting gender equality within radiology, a predominately male field. In this study, our aim was to quantify gender representation in neuroradiology faculty rankings and determine any related factors that may contribute to any such disparity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated the academic and administrative faculty members of neuroradiology divisions for all on-line listed programs in the US and Canada. After excluding programs that did not fulfill our selection criteria, we generated a short list of 85 US and 8 Canadian programs. We found 465 faculty members who met the inclusion criteria for our study. We used Elsevier's SCOPUS for gathering the data pertaining to the publications, H-index, citations, and tenure of the productivity of each faculty member.

RESULTS

Gender disparity was insignificant when analyzing academic ranks. There are more men working in neuroimaging relative to women (χ² = 0.46; P = .79). However, gender disparity was highly significant for leadership positions in neuroradiology (χ² = 6.76; P = .009). The median H-index was higher among male faculty members (17.5) versus female faculty members (9). Female faculty members have odds of 0.84 compared with male faculty members of having a higher H-index, adjusting for publications, citations, academic ranks, leadership ranks, and interaction between gender and publications and gender and citations (9).

CONCLUSIONS

Neuroradiology faculty members follow the same male predominance seen in many other specialties of medicine. In this study, issues such as mentoring, role models, opportunities to engage in leadership/research activities, funding opportunities, and mindfulness regarding research productivity are explored.

Are they ready? Organizational readiness for change among clinical teaching teams

INTRODUCTION

Curriculum change and innovation are inevitable parts of progress in postgraduate medical education (PGME). Although implementing change is known to be challenging, change management principles are rarely looked at for support. Change experts contend that organizational readiness for change (ORC) is a critical precursor for the successful implementation of change initiatives. Therefore, this study explores whether assessing ORC in clinical teaching teams could help to understand how curriculum change takes place in PGME.

METHODS

Clinical teaching teams in hospitals in the Netherlands were requested to complete the Specialty Training's Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change, a questionnaire to measure ORC in clinical teaching teams. In addition, change-related behavior was measured by using the "behavioral support-for-change" measure. A two-way analysis of variance was performed for all response variables of interest.

RESULTS

In total, 836 clinical teaching team members were included in this study: 288 (34.4%) trainees, 307 (36.7%) clinical staff members, and 241 (28.8%) program directors. Overall, items regarding whether the program director has the authority to lead scored higher compared with the other items. At the other end, the subscales "management support and leadership," "project resources," and "implementation plan" had the lowest scores in all groups.

DISCUSSION

The study brought to light that program directors are clearly in the lead when it comes to the implementation of educational innovation. Clinical teaching teams tend to work together as a team, sharing responsibilities in the implementation process. However, the results also reinforce the need for change management support in change processes in PGME.

Association Between Study Quality and Publication Rates of Medical Education Abstracts Presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting

BACKGROUND

Studies reveal that 44.5% of abstracts presented at national meetings are subsequently published in indexed journals, with lower rates for abstracts of medical education scholarship.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether the quality of medical education abstracts is associated with subsequent publication in indexed journals, and to compare the quality of medical education abstracts presented as scientific abstracts versus innovations in medical education (IME).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Medical education abstracts presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) 2009 annual meeting.

MAIN MEASURES

Publication rates were measured using database searches for full-text publications through December 2013. Quality was assessed using the validated Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).

KEY RESULTS

Overall, 64 (44%) medical education abstracts presented at the 2009 SGIM annual meeting were subsequently published in indexed medical journals. The MERSQI demonstrated good inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation range, 0.77-1.00) for grading the quality of medical education abstracts. MERSQI scores were higher for published versus unpublished abstracts (9.59 vs. 8.81, p = 0.03). Abstracts with a MERSQI score of 10 or greater were more likely to be published (OR 3.18, 95% CI 1.47-6.89, p = 0.003). ). MERSQI scores were higher for scientific versus IME abstracts (9.88 vs. 8.31, p < 0.001). Publication rates were higher for scientific abstracts (42 [66%] vs. 37 [46%], p = 0.02) and oral presentations (15 [23%] vs. 6 [8%], p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of medical education abstracts presented at the 2009 SGIM annual meeting was similar to reported publication rates for biomedical research abstracts, but higher than publication rates reported for medical education abstracts. MERSQI scores were associated with higher abstract publication rates, suggesting that attention to measures of quality--such as sampling, instrument validity, and data analysis--may improve the likelihood that medical education abstracts will be published.

Barriers to success for female physicians in academic medicine

Despite the fact that women now comprise half of the medical student and resident populations, women remain underrepresented in prominent leadership positions in academia. Women are challenging themselves to live up to the expectations of their professional peers, society, and their patients in order to ‘have it all.’ These pressures are leading to professional and personal dissatisfaction. Is this a problem that will resolve itself as the younger generations of female physicians graduate into faculty positions, or does it require more attention from both male and female medical professionals?

Assessment of educational criteria in academic promotion: Perspectives of faculty members of medical sciences universities in Iran

INTRODUCTION

One of the important criteria in the promotion of faculty members is in the scope of their educational roles and duties. The purpose of this study was the assessment of reasonability and attainability of educational criteria for scientific rank promotion from the perspective of the faculty members of Medical Sciences Universities in Iran.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This descriptive study was conducted in 2011 in 13 Universities of Medical Sciences in Iran. Through stratified sampling method, 350 faculty members were recruited. A questionnaire developed by the researchers was used to investigate the reasonability and attainability of educational criteria with scores from 1 to 5. The self-administered questionnaire was distributed and collected at each university. The mean and standard deviation of reasonability and attainability scores were calculated and reported by using the SPSS software version 16.

RESULTS

Faculty members considered many criteria of educational activities reasonable and available (with a mean score of more than 3). The highest reasonability and attainability have been obtained by the quantity and quality of teaching with the mean scores (3.93 ± 1.15 and 3.82 ± 1.17) and (3.9 ± 1.22 and 4.13 ± 1.06) out of five, respectively. The mean and standard deviation of total scores of reasonability of educational activities were 50.91 ± 14.22 and its attainability was 60.3 ± 13.72 from the total score of 90.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The faculty members of the Universities of Medical Sciences in Iran considered the educational criteria of promotion moderately reasonable and achievable. It is recommended to revise these criteria and adapt them according to the mission and special conditions of medical universities. Furthermore, providing feedback of evaluations, running educational researches, and implementing faculty development programs are suggested.

Mentorship, productivity, and promotion among academic hospitalists

BACKGROUND

United States academic hospitals have rapidly adopted the hospitalist model of care. Academic hospitalists have taken on much of the clinical and teaching responsibilities at many institutions, yet little is known about their academic productivity and promotion.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to discover the attitudes and attributes of academic hospitalists regarding mentorship, productivity, and promotion.

DESIGN

We performed a web-based email survey of academic hospitalists consisting of 61 questions.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred and twenty academic hospitalists.

MAIN MEASURES

Demographic details, scholarly production, presence of mentorship and attitudes towards mentor, academic rank

KEY RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty-six (63%) of hospitalists responded. The majority were under 41 (80%) and had been working as hospitalists for <5 years (62%). Only 42% of academic hospitalists had a mentor. Forty-four percent of hospitalists had not presented a poster or abstract at national meeting; 51% had not been first author on a peer-reviewed publication. Factors positively associated with publication of a peer-reviewed first author paper included: 1) male gender, AOR = 2.38 (95% CI 1.30, 4.33), 2) >20% "protected" time, AOR = 1.92 (95% CI 1.00, 3.69), and 3) a better-than-average understanding of the criteria for promotion, AOR = 3.66 (95% CI 1.76, 7.62). A lack of mentorship was negatively associated with producing any peer-reviewed first author publications AOR = 0.43 (95% CI 0.23, 0.81); any non-peer reviewed publications AOR = 0.45 (95% CI 0.24, 0.83), and leading a teaching session at a national meeting AOR = 0.41 (95% CI 0.19, 0.88). Most hospitalists promoted to the level of associate professor had been first author on four to six peer-reviewed publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Most academic hospitalists had not presented a poster at a national meeting, authored an academic publication, or presented grand rounds at their institution. Many academic hospitalists lacked mentorship and this was associated with a failure to produce scholarly activity. Mentorship may improve academic productivity among hospitalists.

Tried and true: a survey of successfully promoted academic hospitalists

BACKGROUND

Academic hospital medicine is a new and rapidly growing field. Hospitalist faculty members often fill roles not typically held by other academic faculty, maintain heavy clinical workloads, and participate in nontraditional activities. Because of these differences, there is concern about how academic hospitalists may fare in the promotions process.

OBJECTIVE

To determine factors critical to the promotion of successfully promoted hospitalists who have achieved the rank of either associate professor or professor.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-three hospitalist faculty members at 22 academic medical centers promoted to associate professor rank or higher between 1995 and 2008.

MEASUREMENTS

Respondents were asked to describe their institution, its promotions process, and the activities contributing to their promotion. We identified trends across respondents.

RESULTS

Twenty-six hospitalists responded, representing 20 institutions (79% response rate). Most achieved promotion in a nontenure track (70%); an equal number identified themselves as clinician-administrators and clinician educators (40%). While hospitalists were engaged in a wide range of activities in the traditional domains of service, education, and research, respondents considered peer-reviewed publication to be the most important activity in achieving promotion. Qualitative responses demonstrated little evidence that being a hospitalist was viewed as a hindrance to promotion.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful promotion in academic hospital medicine depends on accomplishment in traditional academic domains, raising potential concerns for academic hospitalists with less traditional roles. This study may provide guidance for early-career academic hospitalists and program leaders.

The role for clinician educators in implementing healthcare improvement

Clinician educators-who work at the intersection of patient care and resident education-are well positioned to respond to calls for better, safer patient care and resident education. Explicit lessons that address implementing health care improvement and associated residency training came out of the Academic Chronic Care Collaboratives and include the importance of: (1) redesigning the clinical practice as a core component of the residency curriculum; (2) exploiting the efficiencies of the practice team; (3) replacing "faculty development" with "everyone's a learner;" (4) linking faculty across learning communities to build expertise; and (5) using rigorous methodology to design and evaluate interventions for practice redesign. There has been progress in addressing three thorny academic faculty issues-professional satisfaction, promotion and publication. For example, consensus criteria have been proposed for both faculty promotion as well as the institutional settings that nurture academic health care improvement careers, and the SQUIRE Publication Guidelines have been developed as a general framework for scholarly improvement publications. Extensive curricular resources exist for developing the expert faculty cadre. Curricula from representative training programs include quantitative and qualitative research methods, statistical methodologies appropriate for measuring systems change, organizational culture, management, leadership and scholarly writing for the improvement literature. Clinician educators-particularly those in general internal medicine-bear the principal responsibility for both patient care and resident training in academic departments of internal medicine. The intersection of these activities presents a unique opportunity for their playing a central role in implementing health care improvement and associated residency training. However, this role in academic settings will require an unambiguous development strategy both for faculty and their institutions.

Advantages and challenges of working as a clinician in an academic department of medicine: academic clinicians' perspectives

BACKGROUND

The provision of high-quality clinical care is critical to the mission of academic and nonacademic clinical settings and is of foremost importance to academic and nonacademic physicians. Concern has been increasingly raised that the rewards systems at most academic institutions may discourage those with a passion for clinical care over research or teaching from staying in academia. In addition to the advantages afforded by academic institutions, academic physicians may perceive important challenges, disincentives, and limitations to providing excellent clinical care. To better understand these views, we conducted a qualitative study to explore the perspectives of clinical faculty in prominent departments of medicine.

METHODS

Between March and May 2007, 2 investigators conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 24 clinically excellent internal medicine physicians at 8 academic institutions across the nation. Transcripts were independently coded by 2 investigators and compared for agreement. Content analysis was performed to identify emerging themes.

RESULTS

Twenty interviewees (83%) were associate professors or professors, 33% were women, and participants represented a wide range of internal medicine subspecialties. Mean time currently spent in clinical care by the physicians was 48%. Domains that emerged related to faculty's perception of clinical care in the academic setting included competing obligations, teamwork and collaboration, types of patients and productivity expectations, resources for clinical services, emphasis on discovery, and bureaucratic challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Expert clinicians at academic medical centers perceive barriers to providing excellent patient care related to competing demands on their time, competing academic missions, and bureaucratic challenges. They also believe there are differences in the types of patients seen in academic settings compared with those in the private sector, that there is a "public" nature in their clinical work, that productivity expectations are likely different from those of private practitioners, and that resource allocation both facilitates and limits excellent care in the academic setting. These findings have important implications for patients, learners, and faculty and academic leaders, and suggest challenges as well as opportunities in fostering clinical medicine at academic institutions.

Implications of academic medicine's failure to recognize clinical excellence

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the implications of inadequately recognizing clinical excellence in academia by exploring the perspectives of clinically excellent faculty within prominent American departments of medicine.

DESIGN

Qualitative study.

SETTING

8 academic institutions.

PARTICIPANTS

24 clinically excellent department of medicine physicians.

METHODS

Between March 1 and May 31, 2007, investigators conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 24 clinically excellent physicians at leading academic institutions. Interview transcripts were independently coded by two investigators and compared for agreement. Content analysis identified themes related to clinical excellence in academia.

RESULTS

Twenty informants (83%) were Associate Professors or Professors, 8 (33%) were females, and the physicians hailed from a wide range of internal medicine specialties. The mean percent effort spent in clinical care by the physicians was 48%. The five domains that emerged related to academic medicine's failure to recognize clinical excellence were: (1) low morale and prestige among clinicians, (2) less than excellent patient care, (3) loss of talented clinicians, (4) a lack of commitment to improve patient care systems, and (5) fewer excellent clinician role models to inspire trainees.

CONCLUSIONS

If academic medical centers fail to recognize clinical excellence among its physicians, they may be doing a disservice to the patients that they pledge to serve. It is hoped that initiatives aiming to measure clinical performance in our academic medical centers will translate into meaningful recognition for those achieving excellence such that outstanding clinicians may feel valued and decide to stay in academia.

A career in surgical oncology: finding meaning, balance, and personal satisfaction

The practice of surgical oncology provides opportunities for both personal distress as well as personal satisfaction. While many surgical oncologists experience career burnout, others derive great meaning and satisfaction from their work. In this article, we review the literature on surgeon burnout, discuss potential personal and professional consequences, and consider steps individual surgeons can take to promote personal and professional satisfaction.

Shaping Your Career to Maximize Personal Satisfaction in the Practice of Oncology

The practice of oncology can be a source of both great satisfaction and great stress. Although many oncologists experience burnout, depression, and dissatisfaction with work, others experience tremendous career satisfaction and achieve a high overall quality of life. Identifying professional goals, optimizing career fit, identifying and managing stressors specific to practice type, and achieving the optimal personal work–life balance can increase the likelihood of individual oncologists' achieving personal and professional satisfaction. In this article, we will explore how oncologists can accomplish these tasks and will examine several pervasive professional myths that often distort perspective. The article concludes in a conversation with four oncologists regarding what they find most meaningful about their work, how they manage career-specific stressors, and how they achieve balance between their personal and professional lives.