The phenotype of pathology residency program directors.

Pathology residency programs vary greatly across the United States. To the authors' knowledge, little is formally known about the "phenotype" or career pathways of pathology residency program directors (PDs). PDs, former PDs (FPDs), and associate PDs (APDs) were surveyed, aiming to address whether or not dominant phenotypes or pathways to graduate medical education leadership exist. Several trends emerged including: 76% Whites, 70% females, 15% MD/PhDs, and more junior faculty (33% being <5 years in practice, another 24% being in practice <10 years, and 41% assistant professors at time of first PD/APD appointment). Anatomic and clinical pathology-certified individuals represented 79%. Sixty-two percent of respondents were on a nontenure employment track, with only 18% indicating tenure track. For subspecialty focus, cytopathology (25%), transfusion medicine (16%), and hematopathology (14%) represented the most common subspecialties practiced. A majority (65%) had served as a chief resident during residency, and most (61%) of PDs had served as APDs first. Most (60%) had not served as fellowship director. Most (65%) had not participated in any education leadership training, with 27% having participated in certificate programs or other educational professional development. Thematic analysis of perceived key criterion in selection for the role was passion for education, demeanor, emotional intelligence, and willingness to serve the department. This information may influence training or experience pursued by individuals aspiring to pathology graduate medical education leadership, inform chairs on qualities to look for, and supplement future educational sessions of the Association of Pathology Chairs Program Directors Council.

The phenotype of academic pathology chairs.

Academic pathology departments across the United States vary greatly in terms of size, clinical workloads and research activity. It is therefore not surprising that their chairs may be an equally diverse group. However, to our knowledge, little is formally known about the "phenotype" (academic credentials, leadership background, and subspecialty focus) or career pathways of these individuals. Using a survey tool, this study sought to determine whether or not dominant phenotypes or trends. Several predominant findings emerged including: race (80% Whites), gender (68% males), dual degrees (41% MD/PhDs), years in practice (56% being in practice >15 years at time of first chair appointment), rank upon appointment (88% holding the rank of professor), and funded research (67% holding research funding). While Anatomic and Clinical Pathology (AP/CP) certified chairs represented 46% of the cohort, 30% were AP-only and another 10% were Anatomic Pathology and Neuropathology (AP/NP) certified. For subspecialty focus, neuropathology (13%) and molecular pathology (15%) were disproportionately represented compared to the general population of pathologists. Previous leadership roles on the path to chairmanship included vice chair (41%), division chief (39%), residency program director (29%), or fellowship director (27%). Many (41%) had not participated in any formal business or leadership training. This information may influence training or experience pursued by individuals aspiring to academic pathology leadership. It also highlights the challenges of suboptimal diversity in race and gender, as well as the professional backgrounds of academic pathology chairs and may suggest consideration of alternate pathways to leadership.

Gender differences in appointments to pathology department interim chair positions and subsequent advancement to permanent chair positions.

Females are under-represented as departmental chairs in academic medical centers and identifying ways to increase their numbers in this position would be useful. A previous study of women chairs of pathology showed that 35% of permanent chairs had previously been interim chairs, suggesting that the interim position was a common pathway for women to advance to a permanent chair position. We sought to determine whether it might also be true for males and if not, possible reasons for the difference. Between January 2016 and June 2022, the Association of Pathology Chairs identified 50 people who had served as interim pathology department chairs. Males served as interim chairs more often than females (66% vs 34%), but, within this time frame, female interim chairs were more likely to become permanent chairs than males (47% of females compared to 27% of males). To better understand the difference in the rate of advancement from interim to permanent chair, we surveyed the 50 individuals who had served as interim chairs to explore gender differences in backgrounds, reasons for serving as interim chairs and reasons for seeking or not seeking the permanent chair position. No significant gender differences were found except that male interim chairs were older (59.2 years) than female interim chairs (50.4 years). This study affirms that serving as an interim chair is a common pathway for females to become permanent chairs, while it is less so for males, although the reasons for this difference could not be determined.