The Virtual Face of Colon and Rectal Surgery Training in the USA: An In-Depth Evaluation and Analysis of Fellowship Programs Website Content.

BACKGROUND: With an ever-evolving digital and virtual world hastened by the COVID-19 pandemic, prospective colon and rectal surgery fellowship applicants must rely on online sources of information, such as websites, rather than in-person visits to fellowship programs. This study analyzes and evaluates the content and accuracy of colon and rectal surgery fellowship program websites. METHODS: The Fellowship and Residency Electronic and Interactive Database website provides a complete collection of colon and rectal surgery fellowship websites based in the USA. The accessibility of the websites was verified via Google search, and relevant content for the applicants was evaluated based on 50-point criteria. RESULTS: Analysis of 60 fellowship program websites was conducted, out of which only a fifth (20%) were kept up to date. Twenty-seven (45%) websites fulfilled 50% of the 50-point criteria. The most and least included data points were program overview (69%) and residential/housing information (24%). Most websites contained basic information relevant to international applicants but lacked crucial information such as visa sponsorship (12%) and city information (23%). CONCLUSION: An informative and easily accessible website is essential for prospective applicants to choose the best program for their career goals and academic needs. This study highlighted multiple areas for potential improvement in the colon and rectal surgery program websites. Individual colon and rectal surgery programs may benefit and attract more candidates to their programs through a fully optimized website design and content.

Does gender influence leadership roles in academic surgery in the United States of America? A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Gender disparity remains prevalent in the field of academic surgery with an under-representation of women at senior leadership ranks. A wide variety of causes are reported to contribute to this gender-based discrimination but a current quantitative analysis in the US has significant importance. This cross-sectional study aims to document gender disparity in academic and leadership positions in surgery as well as its relationship with scholarly productivity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The American Medical Association's Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA), was used to identify General Surgery programs. Each institution's website was used to identify its faculty's primary profiles for data collection. Individuals with an MD or DO, and an academic ranking of Professor, Associate Professor or Assistant Professor were included. Academic productivity was quantified by recording H-index, number of publications, number of citations, and years of active research of a physician. All statistical analysis was performed on SPSS Statistics version 20.0. RESULTS: A total of 144 academic programs were including in our analysis constituting 4085 surgeons, only one-fifth (n = 873, 21%) of which were women. Furthermore, only 19% of all leadership positions were assumed by female surgeons. Leadership positions and academic rank correlated significantly with increasing research productivity. The difference in H-index between genders was statistically significant (P < 0.05) with men possessing a higher median for H-index [13] than women [9]. Transplantation Surgery [17] had the highest median H-indices for female surgeons. Male surgeons (n = 18) were twice as likely to be Departmental Chairs as their female counterparts (n = 9). However, female surgical oncologists held the highest proportion of leadership positions (31%). CONCLUSION: A significant gender-based disparity was found in leadership positions and academic ranks. Research productivity appeared to be integral for academic and leadership appointments. Institution-level measures that enhance support, mentorship, and sponsorship for women are imperative to achieve overall parity in general surgery.