Long-Term Outcomes of Pediatric Laryngeal Reinnervation.

OBJECTIVE: Pediatric nonselective laryngeal reinnervation (NSLR) has gained popularity in recent years; however, long-term outcomes have not been reported. METHODS: Patients greater than 1 year post reinnervation were recruited. Families were asked to report Pediatric Voice-Related Quality of Life (PVRQOL) and provide an audio recording of connected speech. PVRQOL and voice measures were compared with preoperative and early postoperative outcomes (<12 months) using analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures and post hoc tests for linear trend. RESULTS: Sixty-six patient families were contacted. Twelve patients responded with PVRQOL; six (50%) were female. Median age at surgery was 6.4 (range 1.9-15) and at follow-up 13.5 (range 10-18), with a median of 6.8 years (range 3-9.1) since surgery at follow-up. Mean preoperative PVRQOL was 68.1 (95% CI 52.3-84.0), early postoperative 86.5 (73.2-99.7), and long-term 90 (82.7-97.3). ANOVA showed no significant difference between values (p = 0.1228), but post hoc testing showed improving outcomes over time (p-for-trend 0.0304). PVRQOL was stable between early postoperative and long-term values (p = 0.3399). Four voice samples were adequate for analysis. Mean preoperative cepstral peak prominence (CPP) was 5.2 (95% CI 3.4-7.0), early postoperative 8.5 (5.5-11.5), and long-term 6.8 (2.77-10.89, p = 0.3340, p-for-trend 0.2988) Low-to-high spectral ratio was 22.3 preoperatively (14.0-30.5), 23.0 early postoperative (17.4-28.7), and 28.8 long-term (17.4-40.2, p = 0.1174, p-for-trend 0.0364). Cepstral spectral index of dysphonia (CSID) was 83.0 preoperatively (44.1-121.8), 39.4 early postoperative (20.4-58.3), and 45.53 long-term (-0.05-91.1, p = 0.4457, p-for-trend 0.1464). CONCLUSIONS: Years after NSLR, PVRQOL, low-to-high spectral ratio, and CSID show no evidence of degradation over time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 2024.

Demographic and applicant-specific predictors of medical school research productivity in a national cohort of dermatology residents.

Research is a crucial aspect of medical advancement, and applicants applying to dermatology often have high research outputs. With United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 becoming pass/fail, research productivity may be more emphasized. We primarily sought to assess predictors of medical school research productivity. Class of 2023 dermatology residents publicly listed on Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs were included. Their medical school bibliography and demographics were assessed using PubMed and other platforms (eg, Doximity, LinkedIn). By multivariable analysis, students who attended a top 25 medical school (ranked by US News and World Report) or were PhD graduates had significantly higher H-indices, average impact factors, and total years of research activity (P < .01). Top 25 medical school graduates also had significantly higher total peer-reviewed publications, first authorships, and clinical research papers (P < .01). PhD graduates had significantly more clinical research and fewer dermatology-related papers (P < .03). Graduates of osteopathic medical schools had significantly fewer review papers (P = .02). Gender and graduation from an international medical school had no relationship with research productivity. Our study demonstrates a correlation between applicant-specific factors and research productivity. Because the emphasis on research productivity may increase, understanding the mechanisms behind these relationships may guide future dermatology applicants or their mentors.

Social Media Impact of Articles Published by Dermatology Residents During Medical School: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The Altmetric score (AS) is a novel measure of publication impact that is calculated by the number of mentions across various social media websites. This method may have advantages over traditional bibliometrics in the context of research by medical students. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether dermatology matriculants who graduated from higher-ranked medical schools published more articles with greater impact (ie, a higher AS) than those from lower-ranked institutions. METHODS: A PubMed search for articles published by dermatology residents who started medical school in 2020 was conducted. Demographic information and Altmetric data were collected, and medical schools were sorted according to US News' top-25 and non-top-25 categories. RESULTS: Residents who completed their medical training at a top-25 institution published more papers (mean 4.93, SD 4.18 vs mean 3.11, SD 3.32; P<.001) and accrued a significantly higher total AS (mean 67.9, SD 160 vs mean 22.9, SD 75.9; P<.001) and average AS (mean 13.1, SD 23.7 vs mean 6.71, SD 32.3; P<.001) per article than those who graduated from non-top-25 schools. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that students in top-25 schools may have greater access to research resources and opportunities. With a pass/fail United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 exam that may increasingly shift focus toward scholarly output from medical students, further discussion on how to create a more equitable dermatology match is essential.