Publications Among Pain Medicine Fellowship-Trained American Board of Anesthesiology Diplomates.

American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) diplomates who pursue clinical fellowship training in pain medicine may be better suited to lead scholarly projects and serve as first authors of publications in peer-reviewed journals given their additional training and clinical expertise. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether ABA certification in pain medicine is associated with a greater number of peer-reviewed publications. The secondary aim included assessments of whether pain medicine fellowship training is associated with a higher publication rate (publications per year) or publication in a larger number of peer-reviewed journals. A literature search was conducted in December 2023 using the Scopus database for publications related to anesthesiology and pain medicine in the United States between 2013 and 2023. First authors identified through the search were then individually searched within the ABA physician directory. The following data were collected: author name and identification number, year of publication, publication type (article or review), year of primary anesthesiology certification, and year of fellowship, if applicable. This study identified 9,612 publications and 6,924 unique first authors. Pain medicine fellowship training was associated with a statistically significant increase (p-value < 0.001) in the number of publications (0.546; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.386-0.707), publications per year (0.140; 95% CI, 0.121-0.159), and publication in a larger number of peer-reviewed journals (0.256; 95% CI, 0.182-0.330) in regression models adjusted for the number of years from certification. This query of the Scopus database and ABA physician directory indicates that pain medicine fellowship training is associated with statistically significant increases in research productivity, as defined by the number of publications, publications per year, or the number of publications in peer-reviewed journals. However, these increases in research output would not lead to a marked increase in scholarship productivity to justify pursuing a fellowship for this purpose.

Factors influencing research productivity among Syrian medical professionals amidst conflict: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Medical research productivity is globally increasing, with a lagging progress in third-world countries due to significant challenges, including inadequate training and brain drain. Syria had been showing a slow upward trend until the war broke out and severely hindered academic growth and productivity. A deeper understanding of the factors influencing research productivity in this context are fundamental to guide educational policies and resource allocation. Previous cross-sectional studies that evaluated the perspectives of Syrian academics on the issue were limited by the small sample size of published healthcare workers, making it difficult to identify the factors that enabled them to pursue research. METHODS: To address this challenge, we employed a case-control design. We isolated published early-career Syrian healthcare workers and compared their characteristics and perceptions to unpublished matched controls. Authors in the fields of medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy affiliated with any Syrian University were identified through an extensive search of PubMed and Google Scholar.These authors were invited to complete a questionnaire that covered participants' research contributions, alongside their self-assessed knowledge, attitudes, and barriers towards research. The questionnaire was publicly published to recruit an equal sample of matching controls, with half consisting of unpublished researchers and the other half of participants without prior research contributions. RESULTS: Six-hundred-sixteen participants were recruited. Their knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers explained 46% and 34% of the variability in research involvement and publication, respectively (P < 0.001). Getting involved in and publishing research studies associated with higher research-related knowledge and attitudes (P < 0.001). Respondents' assessment of research-related barriers and their academic scores did not differ between cases and controls. Superior research-related knowledge and attitudes were associated with male gender, higher English competency, and better internet connectivity. Meanwhile, extracurricular training and mentors' support were associated with more positive research-related attitudes and less perceived barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Research productivity of medical professionals in Syria exhibits a positive correlation with their knowledge and favorable attitudes towards medical research. Noteworthy, the demographic variations are linked to disparities in research-related knowledge and motivation. In conclusion, these results suggest a potential avenue for enhancement through concentrated efforts on improving extracurricular training interventions and mentors' support.

The orthodontic research trends in Arab League Nations from 2002 to 2021: A bibliometric appraisal.

The evaluation of publication growth is a vital indicator to assess any branch of knowledge. The present study aimed to investigate the Scopus-indexed publications on orthodontics produced by the Arab League Nations in the last two decades (2002-2021). Quantitative research method based on bibliometric analysis has been used and the meta-data for the study was retrieved from Elsevier's Scopus database on November 14, 2022. The bibliographic description of all types of literature published on orthodontics from 2002 to 2021 by the authors affiliated with the Arab countries has been downloaded. The selected bibliometric indicators of the data were analyzed by using Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer and SPSS software. The Arab League Nations contributed 5.02 % to global orthodontic research. This segment has demonstrated an amazing escalation of documents from a global perspective between 2002 and 2021 from 1.24 % to 10.94 %. Slightly more than 60 % of documents were published during the last five years of study (2017-2021). The highest number of documents (41 %) was produced by Saudi Arabia, whereas documents contributed by Jordan gained the maximum citation impact. The majority of collaboration was done with the United States, but documents produced in collaboration with Turkey gained the highest citation impact. The paper highlighted that the share of Arab League Nations in orthodontic research has been growing, and Saudi Arabia emerged as the most productive country. The constructive evolution of orthodontic literature with international collaboration display an ambitious approach by Arab countries.

Evaluating the Factors Influencing Residency Match for Surgical Specialty Applicants and Programs: Challenges and Future Directions.

INTRODUCTION: We aim to evaluate the impact of recent changes in the residency matching process on surgical specialties' applicants and programs to offer recommendations on residency selection and matching processes. METHODS: We utilized five databases while employing a Boolean query to search for studies from 2015 to March 2024. The search selection focused on factors and recent changes influencing residency match results across surgical specialties, including USMLE Step 1 pass/fail, research productivity, interview structure, and preference and geographic signaling. RESULTS: The shift of the USMLE Step 1 to a pass/fail scoring system revealed a consensus among surgical program directors (PDs) and applicants not in favor of the change due to the emphasis on additional application elements. Research productivity was identified as a significant factor, especially in neurosurgery (with an average of 18.3 publications per applicant) and vascular surgery (8.3 publications), indicating a positive correlation between the number of publications and match outcomes. The adoption of virtual interviews has been well-received by both applicants and PDs, leading to an increase in the number of interviews offered and applicants. The implementation of preference and geographic signaling mechanisms has improved interview rates for applicants who utilize them. CONCLUSION: The transition to a pass/fail USMLE Step 1 has raised concerns among surgical specialties, necessitating a greater focus on Step 2 scores and research productivity. Virtual interviews and signaling have improved the accessibility and reach of the residency application process, however, the full impact of these changes on the perception of applicant-program fit remains unclear.

Trajectories of biomedical research leading to Nobel Prize-winning discoveries.

Significant advancements in public health come from scientific discoveries, but more are needed to meet the ever-growing societal needs. Examining the best practices of outstanding scientists may help develop future researchers and lead to more discoveries. This study compared the comprehensive work of 49 Nobel laureates in Physiology or Medicine from 2000 to 2019 to a matched control of National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded biomedical investigators. Our unique data set, comprising 11,737 publications, 571 US patents, and 1693 NIH research awards produced by pre-Nobel laureates, was compared to a similar data set of control researchers. Compared to control researchers, pre-Nobel laureates produce significantly more publications annually (median = 5.66; interquartile range [IQR] = 5.16); significantly fewer coauthors per publication (median = 3.32; IQR = 1.95); consistently higher Journal Impact Factor publications (median = 12.04; IQR = 6.83); and substantially more patents per researcher (median = 5; IQR = 14). Such differences arose from nearly identical cumulative NIH award budgets of pre-Nobel laureates (median $25.3 M) and control researchers. Nobel laureates are neither hyper-prolific (>72 papers per year) nor hyper-funded (>$100 M cumulative). An academic age-specific trajectory graph allows aspiring researchers to compare their productivity and collaboration patterns to those of pre-Nobel laureates.

Factors Associated with Research Productivity and National Institutes of Health Funding in Academic Otology.

OBJECTIVES: Bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index (h-index) and the more recently developed relative citation ratio (RCR), are utilized to evaluate research productivity. Our study evaluates demographics, research productivity, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in academic otology. METHODS: Academic otologists were identified, and their demographics were collected using institutional faculty profiles (N = 265). Funding data were obtained using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports Database. The h-index was calculated using Scopus and mean (m-RCR) and weighted RCR (w-RCR) were calculated using the NIH iCite tool. RESULTS: H-index (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.27, p < 0.001), but not m-RCR (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97-2.31, p = 0.069) or w-RCR (aOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00, p = 0.231), was associated with receiving NIH funding. Men had greater h-index (16 vs. 9, p < 0.001) and w-RCR (51.8 vs. 23.0, p < 0.001), but not m-RCR (1.3 vs. 1.3, p = 0.269) than women. Higher academic rank was associated with greater h-index and w-RCR (p < 0.001). Among assistant professors, men had greater h-index than women (9.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.025). At career duration 11-20 years, men had greater h-index (14.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.009) and w-RCR (52.7 vs. 25.8, p = 0.022) than women. CONCLUSION: The h-index has a strong relationship with NIH funding in academic otology. Similar h-index, m-RCR, and w-RCR between men and women across most academic ranks and career durations suggests production of similarly impactful research. The m-RCR may correct some deficiencies of time-dependent bibliometrics and its consideration in academic promotion and research funding allocation may promote representation of women in otology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:3786-3794, 2024.

Rapid increase in departmental scholarly activity independent of residents demonstrates reproducibility and success of intensive research initiative in neurosurgery department.

BACKGROUND: Neurological surgery remains one of the most competitive specialties with a match rate of <70%. Historically, medical student performance was gauged through the USMLE Step 1. However, with the recent exam score change, metrics such as recommendation letters, research, and clerkship grades carry increased importance. Research experiences vary greatly between institutions and medical students depend on faculty/resident mentorship in order to facilitate scholarly activity. We previously reported our 2-year intensive research initiative (IRI) in a neurosurgery program. Here we report successful implementation of the IRI in a disparate setting, a department devoid of residents, and demonstrate the IRI's reproducibility with non-resident learners. MATERIALS & METHODS: We compared retrospective data from 2007 to 2020 with the IRI's results during the 2-year study period (July 2020-July 2022). RESULTS: The IRI resulted in a rapid exponential increase in publications, with medical student led peer-reviewed publications (PRPs) increasing 1000% and pre-residency fellow (PRF) PRPs increasing by 4900%. Learner involvement on PRPs pre-IRI was 31%, increasing to 72% post-IRI implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We present the IRI's success increasing academic productivity despite utilizing only non-resident learners. Students underrepresented in medicine and those at non-tier 1 institutions receive unequal research and clinical opportunities, therefore, prioritizing and providing sufficient opportunities/mentorship is crucial in their success in matching into competitive specialties. Our IRI allows for early faculty/resident student mentorship and gives students more flexibility as it allows medical students at varying stages to participate in research with no set time frame.

What factors are associated with the research productivity of primary care researchers in Canada? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Research evidence to inform primary care policy and practice is essential for building high-performing primary care systems. Nevertheless, research output relating to primary care remains low worldwide. This study describes the factors associated with the research productivity of primary care researchers. METHODS: A qualitative, descriptive key informant study approach was used to conduct semi-structured interviews with twenty-three primary care researchers across Canada. Qualitative data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-three primary care researchers participated in the study. An interplay of personal (psychological characteristics, gender, race, parenthood, education, spousal occupation, and support), professional (mentorship before appointment, national collaborations, type of research, career length), institutional (leadership, culture, resources, protected time, mentorship, type), and system (funding, systematic bias, environment, international collaborations, research data infrastructure) factors were perceived to be associated with research productivity. Research institutes and mentors facilitated collaborations, and mentors and type of research enabled funding success. Jurisdictions with fewer primary care researchers had more national collaborations but fewer funding opportunities. The combination of institutional, professional, and system factors were barriers to the research productivity of female and/or racialized researchers. CONCLUSIONS: This study illuminates the intersecting and multifaceted influences on the research productivity of primary care researchers. By exploring individual, professional, institutional, and systemic factors, we underscore the pivotal role of diverse elements in shaping RP. Understanding these intricate influencers is imperative for tailored, evidence-based interventions and policies at the level of academic institutions and funding agencies to optimize resources, promote fair evaluation metrics, and cultivate inclusive environments conducive to diverse research pursuits within the PC discipline in Canada.

Correlation between research productivity during and after orthopaedic surgery training.

Background: Research experience is mandatory for all Orthopaedic Surgery residency programs. Although the allocation of required protected time and resources varies from program to program, the underlying importance of research remains consistent with mutual benefit to both residents and the program and faculty. Authorship and publications have become the standard metric used to evaluate academic success. This study aimed to determine if there is a correlation between the research productivity of Orthopaedic Surgery trainees and their subsequent research productivity as attending Orthopaedic Surgeons. Methods: Using the University of Mississippi Orthopaedic Residency Program Research Productivity Rank List, 30 different Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs were analyzed for the names of every graduating surgeon in their 2013 class. PubMed Central was used to screen all 156 physicians and collect all publications produced by them between 2008 and August 2022. Results were separated into two categories: Publications during training and Publications post-training. Results: As defined above, 156 Surgeons were analyzed for publications during training and post-training. The mean number of publications was 7.02 ± 17.819 post-training vs. 2.47 ± 4.313 during training, P < 0.001. The range of publication post-training was 0-124 vs. 0-30 during training. Pearson correlation between the two groups resulted in a value of 0.654, P < 0.001. Conclusion: Higher research productivity while training correlates to higher productivity post-training, but overall Orthopaedic surgeons produce more research after training than during. With the growing importance of research, more mentorship, time, and resources must be dedicated to research to instill and foster greater participation while in training.

Impact of Early Research Productivity on Future Academic Output Among Head and Neck Fellows.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of pre-fellowship publications on future research productivity and career placement among head and neck (H&N) surgery fellowship graduates. METHODS: H&N surgery fellowship graduates between 2014 and 2022 were identified from publicly available data. Timing of fellowship graduation, number of publications during each stage of education and training, and number of first authorship publications were analyzed for association with scholarly productivity and academic career placement. RESULTS: In our analysis of 409 H&N fellowship graduates, there was a strong positive correlation between the year of fellowship graduation and the average number of publications in residency (R2 = 0.82) and fellowship (R2 = 0.79). Graduates producing more than the average of 2.37 publications prior to residency had a significantly higher average number of publications during residency and fellowship compared to those who published below average (p < 0.001). A higher number of publications prior to and during residency were both independently associated with a higher likelihood of academic career placement (p = 0.015 and p = 0.002, respectively). More first-author publications prior to residency were associated with a higher number of publications during residency and fellowship (p = 0.015). In sub-analyses, gender did not impact the average number of publications during residency and fellowship. Similarly, the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly impact the average number of publications during the fellowship when comparing the classes of 2020-2022 to 2017-2019. CONCLUSION: Research productivity among H&N fellowship graduates has increased in recent years. Research productivity in medical school and residency is associated with scholarly output in later stages of training and academic career placement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 134:3165-3169, 2024.

The Relative Citation Ratio: An Impartial Assessment of Productivity in Academic Otolaryngologists.

OBJECTIVES: Quantification of academic productivity relies on bibliometric measurements, such as the Hirsch index (h-index). The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently developed the relative citation ratio (RCR), an article-level, citation-driven metric that compares researchers with others within their respective fields. Our study is the first to compare the usage of RCR in academic otolaryngology. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Database Review. METHODS: Academic otolaryngology residency programs were identified using the 2022 Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. Demographic and training data were collected for surgeons using institutional websites. RCR was calculated using the NIH iCite tool, and h-index was calculated using Scopus. Mean RCR (m-RCR) is the average score of the author's articles. Weighted RCR (w-RCR) is the sum of all article scores. These derivatives are a measure of impact and output, respectively. The career duration of a physician was categorized into the following cohorts: 0-10, 11-20, 21-30, and 31+ years. RESULTS: A total of 1949 academic otolaryngologists were identified. Men had higher h-indices and w-RCRs than women (both p less than 0.001). m-RCR was not different between genders (p = 0.083). There was a difference in h-index and w-RCR (both p less than 0.001) among the career duration cohorts, but there was no difference in m-RCR among the cohorts (p = 0.416). The faculty rank professor was the greatest for all metrics (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Critics of the h-index argue that it is reflective of the time a researcher has spent in the field, instead of impact. The RCR may reduce historic bias against women and younger otolaryngologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 134:592-599, 2024.

Demographics and Research Activity Among 2023 Academic Glaucoma Specialists.

PURPOSE: To characterize demographics, academic characteristics, and research activity of academic glaucoma specialists. METHODS: Faculty demographic and academic data were recorded for glaucoma specialist faculty from 99 United States ophthalmology residency programs using institutional websites, Doximity, and LinkedIn. H-index was calculated using Scopus. Mean and weighted relative citation ratio (RCR), measuring research impact and productivity, respectively, was determined with the National Institute of Health iCite tool. RESULTS: Most academic glaucoma specialists were men (0.61), located in the Southern United States (0.316), and in practice for less than or equal to 10 years in 2023 (0.324). Twenty-six percent had additional professional degrees, and 11% completed fellowship training in addition to clinical glaucoma. Assistant professor was the most common academic appointment (0.479), and almost a quarter (0.23) had additional positions. Mean h-index (13.3), mean-RCR (1.76), and weighted-RCR (84.0) were consistent with high research productivity and impact. Gender comparison found that men had significantly higher h-index (p < .001), m-RCR (p = .007), w-RCR (p < .001) as compared to women. H-index (p < .001; p < .001; p < .001), m-RCR (p = .006; p < .001; p < .001), and w-RCR (p < .001; p < .001; p < .001) also increased with career duration, academic position, and additional academic appointments, respectively. Additional training was associated with higher h-index (p = .023) and w-RCR (p = .012), but not m-RCR (p = .699). CONCLUSION: Higher research activity is significantly associated with higher departmental positions and additional academic appointments. This illustrates the importance of research contributions for academic promotion. Variations in research activity by gender distribution may therefore affect opportunities for career advancement.

Perceived research productivity of women in higher education: An investigation of the impact of COVID-19.

This study focuses on the predictors of women academics' perceived research productivity during the pandemic in Türkiye, by taking the changes in paid and unpaid workload alongside the felt pressure concerning productivity into consideration. Predicting the odds to report an above the mean level of decrease in perceived research productivity, unlike expected, increased housework time and administrative workload presented no statistically significant effect. On the other hand, extended care responsibilities (including but not limited to childcare) and felt pressure concerning research performance during the pandemic strongly predicted a high level of reported decrease in research productivity. Findings highlight that institutional care support mechanisms should be among the primary concerns since the pandemic has made the already existing gender inequalities in academia more visible in terms of the challenges women face in balancing paid and unpaid work. In addition, as excess pressure felt by women academics regarding research performance is linked to a decline in reported productivity, creating a compassionate environment in academia not only in unprecedented circumstances but at all times needs to be priority.

Impact of Integrated Vascular Surgery Residency Training Pathway and Professional Development Time on Career Choice and Research Productivity.

OBJECTIVE: The limited availability of academic surgery positions has led to increased competition for these jobs. Integrated vascular surgery residency (IVSR) allows for earlier specialization, with some programs providing professional development time (PDT). We hypothesized that IVSR and PDT lead to academic employment and increased research productivity. DESIGN: This is a retrospective study of vascular surgery fellowship (VSF) and IVSR graduates. SETTING: Training, number of publications, H-index, NIH funding, and employment history were collected using institutional websites, Doximity, Scopus, PubMed, and NIH Research Portfolio Reporting. PARTICIPANTS: After a review of the research protocol, the Association of Program Directors in Vascular Surgery (APDVS) provided a list of vascular surgery fellowship (VSF) and IVSR graduates. METHODS: After review of the research protocol, the Association of Program Directors in Vascular Surgery (APDVS) provided a list of vascular surgery fellowship (VSF) and IVSR graduates. Training, number of publications, H-index, NIH funding, and employment history were collected using institutional websites, Doximity, Scopus, PubMed, and NIH Research Portfolio Reporting. RESULTS: From 2013-2017, comparison of IVSR (n=131) to VSF (n=603) graduates showed that IVSR graduates were more likely to be women (38.17% vs 28.19%; p = 0.024), be MD graduates (99.24% vs 93.37%; p = 0.008), attended programs in the northeast (41.98% vs 27.5%; p < 0.001), have advanced degrees (13.74% vs 6.97%; p = 0.01) and graduate from larger programs (median 15 vs 14 faculty; p = 0.013). There was no significant difference in number of publications per trainee by the end of training (median 4 vs 3; P=0.61) or annual trend in average number of publications. After training, there was no significant difference in the type of practice, academic affiliation, practice region, publication number, H-index, NIH funding, level of academic appointment, or leadership positions. From 2013-2019, a comparison of IVSR graduates with (n=32) and without PDT (n=190) demonstrated that those with PDT were more likely to be women (53.13% vs 34.74%; p = 0.038), have advanced degrees (28.12% vs 8.95%; p = 0.002), be at larger programs (median 14 vs 9 faculty; p < 0.001), train at a top 10 NIH funded program (65.62% vs 21.58%; p < 0.001) and publish more by the end of IVSR (median 9 vs 3; p < 0.001). Graduates with PDT were more likely to have academic employment and affiliation, a higher yearly publication rate, and greater H-index. CONCLUSION: IVSR and VSF graduates have comparable academic employment and research productivity. However, PDT during IVSR correlates with an eventual academic career and greater research productivity. This study supports the importance of PDT in developing academic vascular surgeons. It remains necessary to continue both IVSR and VSF training paradigms as healthcare needs of the population are met through both academic and non-academic surgeons.

The Development of a Clinical Research Model Complementing Medical Residency and the Assessment of Research Productivity.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Despite modern healthcare infrastructure, there is a paucity of information about the clinical research framework supporting healthcare in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Therefore, this study aimed to assess research performance productivity, and the clinical research framework, complementing medical residency, at the nation's hub for clinical research. METHODS: A cross-sectional retrospective review of records from the research database of the institution was conducted to assess productivity, and framework development, and data analyzed. RESULTS:  The migration of global healthcare providers, and the pharmaceutical industry offices, the adoption of the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) guidelines, and electronic medical records established a research culture. Following the development of the governance framework, a total of 1,328 research projects were submitted to the ethics committee until 2023. Approximately 63% of the total studies were of minimal risk, followed by industry-sponsored clinical trials (4.9%, 58/1,163), and prospective interventional studies (3.5%, 39/1,163). Almost half (48.3%, 28/58) of the total industry-sponsored clinical trials were phase II and phase III. The number of peer-reviewed indexed publications, a measure of research productivity, indicated that the periods between 2011 and 2015, 2016 and 2020, and 2021 and 2023 witnessed a 3.8-, 9.3-, and 7.9-fold increase compared to the baseline period (1995-2005). The implementation of the Focus on International Research Strategy, Teaching, Evaluation, and Mentoring (FIRSTEM) strategy, to accommodate mandatory research activity requirements for residents by the physician licensing boards, observed substantial increases in output. The number of international peer-reviewed indexed publications/resident projects doubled from 10.8% (2010-2015) to 24% (2016-2020) and reached 40.1% in 2023. CONCLUSION: This is the first research governance model established in the UAE, a country with an increasing prevalence of diabetes, and cardiovascular and genetic diseases. The model indicates that the medical trainees differentiate the best research evidence in making decisions about the clinical care of patients. The study outcomes may potentially be useful for other countries in developing a clinical research framework.

Gender distribution and NIH funding rank in dermatology leadership: a cross-sectional analysis.

In examining the influence of National Institute of Health (NIH) funding on gender distribution within dermatology leadership roles, a cross-sectional analysis of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited dermatology residencies was conducted. The gender of leadership faculty was verified using online resources, while institutions were categorized by their 2022 NIH dermatology funding status. Results revealed that male dermatologists predominantly occupied department chair roles, whereas female dermatologists were more frequently found in associate program director roles, regardless of funding status. Notably, women held most program director positions in the top NIH-funded group, though this difference was not statistically significant due to a smaller sample size. The overall gender distribution has shown progress from 2021, with a significant rise in female associate program directors and a narrowing gender gap for chairs and program directors. Despite NIH funding rank playing a minimal role in gender distribution, our study underscores positive strides towards gender equality in dermatology leadership. Further advocacy for gender balance and additional research on underlying factors are essential for continued progress.

Analysis of Research Productivity of Orthopedic Surgery Residency Applicants.

Background Orthopedic surgery has become an increasingly competitive specialty. With a pass-fail Step 1, an even greater emphasis on research has been placed to allow candidates to better distinguish themselves. This study analyzes the scholarly activity of accepted orthopedic residency applicants during medical school, assessing what factors, including the novel altmetric attention score, may be associated with greater research productivity. Methods A list of orthopedic residency programs was obtained from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS). A total of 688 orthopedic residents from 180 programs who matriculated in 2020 from allopathic medical schools were identified. Resident demographic information and bibliometric data (total publications, orthopedic-related publications, h-index, and altmetric score) of publications published from July 1, 2016, to September 1, 2020, were collected. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Kruskal-Wallis tests analyzed the association between medical school characteristics and research productivity using Stata® 17.0 (StataCorp LLC, College Station, Texas). Results Postgraduate-Year-3 orthopedic residents (N=688) published 2,600 articles during medical school, averaging 3.8 articles per resident. The residents from a top 25 medical school for research had publication counts, altmetric scores, and h-indices, on average, that were higher than those from non-top 25 medical schools for research. Over 150 residents had no publications, and ~10 residents had more than 30 publications. Conclusions The results illustrate that medical school research status influences the research productivity of applicants. Also, given the average number of publications, most research listed on applications are abstracts and presentations. Utilization of the altmetric score may not yet be the best way of examining research experience because orthopedic applicants do not appear to use social networks for academic research.

Does Academic Productivity Correlate With Industry Payments in Hand Surgery Fellowship Programs in the United States?

BACKGROUND: Hand surgeons and the industry share a common goal to improve the care of patients. However, industry support remains controversial, and the current relationship with fellowship programs remains unclear. This study explores the relationship between industry support and research productivity among hand surgeons in the academic setting. METHODS: The Open Payments database, created by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) as a result of the Sunshine Act, was used to identify supplemental income paid to physicians of hand surgery fellowships in the United States. Both lifetime individual physician and aggregated fellowship Sunshine Act supplemental income (2015-2021) were collected for review. Supplemental income only reflects royalties, consulting fees, or food and does not include direct research funding. H-index was collected through the Scopus website as a proxy for academic productivity. RESULTS: Six hundred and thirty-four faculty physicians (90.8%) from 94 hand surgery fellowships (100%) were included in the study. The mean individual physician lifetime supplemental income was $67,272 (median $341,861), whereas the mean individual physician H-index was 12.5 (median 9.0). There was a significant and weak positive correlation between individual physician H-index and lifetime income (p<0.001). Similarly, there was a significant and moderately positive correlation between the combined fellowship H-index and total lifetime income (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Research productivity of an orthopedic hand fellowship group and individual academic hand surgeon correlate with overall industry support from indirect research funding. Further work is required to better understand the advantages and disadvantages of industry support of academically productive hand surgeons at hand surgery fellowships.

Impact of Gap Years Following Medical School Graduation on Resident Research Productivity in Ophthalmology.

Background Gap years following medical school graduation have become more common, but research into their tangible career benefit is lacking. Examining the impact of gap years on resident scholarly productivity in ophthalmology may provide insight generalizable to all specialties. Objective To evaluate whether a gap year following medical school graduation significantly predicts scholarly productivity during ophthalmology residency. Methods In December 2021, residents were recorded from 110 publicly available American ophthalmology residency program webpages. They were included if educational history was listed on publicly accessible academic and social media profiles. Residents were then stratified into gap year and nongap year cohorts. Publication data were recorded from Scopus and PubMed. Pearson's chi-square, independent sample t -tests, and multivariable regression were performed. Results A total of 1,206 residents were analyzed, with 1,036 (85.9%) residents taking no gap year and 170 (14.1%) residents with at least one gap year. Gap year residents were predicted to have increase in the likelihoods of publishing at least one, two, or five total articles during residency, in addition to at least one article in a high-impact journal. There was no significant relationship between gap years and publications with senior authors affiliated with either the resident's medical school or residency program. Conclusion Residents taking gap years following graduation may publish more during residency, but these publications are not associated with senior authors at their institutions. Future investigations should continue to evaluate the significance of gap years in medical education.