Dataset Information

Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Faculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation.

Methods

We surveyed the Chairs of academic Departments of Medicine in the United States in 2012. We sent a paper-based questionnaire along with a personalized invitation letter by postal mail. For non-responders, we sent reminder letters, then called them and faxed them the questionnaire. The questionnaire included 8 questions with 23 tabulated close-ended items about the types of productivity measured (clinical, research, teaching, administrative) and the measurement strategies used. We conducted descriptive analyses.

Results

Chairs of 78 of 152 eligible departments responded to the survey (51% response rate). Overall, 82% of respondents reported measuring at least one type of faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. Amongst those measuring faculty productivity, types measured were: clinical (98%), research (61%), teaching (62%), and administrative (64%). Percentages of respondents who reported the use of standardized measurements units (e.g., Relative Value Units (RVUs)) varied from 17% for administrative productivity to 95% for research productivity. Departments reported a wide variation of what exact activities are measured and how they are monetarily compensated. Most compensation plans take into account academic rank (77%). The majority of compensation plans are in the form of a bonus on top of a fixed salary (66%) and/or an adjustment of salary based on previous period productivity (55%).

Conclusion

Our survey suggests that most academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity and convert it into standardized units for the purpose of salary compensation. The exact activities that are measured and how they are monetarily compensated varied substantially across departments.

SUBMITTER: Kairouz VF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4189191 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey.

Kairouz Victor F VF Raad Dany D Fudyma John J Curtis Anne B AB Schünemann Holger J HJ Akl Elie A EA

BMC medical education 20140926

<h4>Background</h4>Faculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation.<h4>Methods</h4>We surveyed the Chairs of academic Departments of Medicine in the United States in 2012. We sent a paper-based questionnaire along with a personalized invitation l ...[more]

PMID: 25257232

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStudies demonstrate that women physicians are less likely than men to be full professors. Comprehensive evidence examining whether sex differences in faculty rank exist in academic cardiology, adjusting for experience and research productivity, is lacking. Therefore, we evaluated for sex differences in faculty rank among a comprehensive, contemporary cohort of US cardiologists after adjustment for several factors that impact academic advancement, including measures of clinical experience and research productivity.MethodsWe identified all US cardiologists with medical school faculty appointments in 2014 by using the American Association of Medical Colleges faculty roster and linked this list to a comprehensive physician database from Doximity, a professional networking website for doctors. Data on physician age, sex, years since residency, cardiology subspecialty, publications, National Institutes of Health grants, and registered clinical trials were available for all academic cardiologists. We estimated sex differences in full professorship, adjusting for these factors and medical school-specific fixed effects in a multivariable regression model.ResultsAmong 3810 cardiologists with faculty appointments in 2014 (13.3% of all US cardiologists), 630 (16.5%) were women. Women faculty were younger than men (mean age, 48.3 years versus 53.5 years, P<0.001), had fewer total publications (mean number: 16.5 publications versus 25.2 publications; P<0.001), were similarly likely to have National Institutes of Health funding (proportion with at least 1 National Institutes of Health award, 10.8% versus 10.4%; P=0.77), and were less likely to have a registered clinical trial (percentage with at least 1 clinical trial, 8.9% versus 11.1%; P=0.10). Among 3180 men, 973 (30.6%) were full professors in comparison with 100 (15.9%) of 630 women. In adjusted analyses, women were less likely to be full professors than men (adjusted odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.94; P=0.02; adjusted proportions, 22.7% versus 26.7%; absolute difference, -4.0%; 95% confidence interval, -7.5% to -0.7%).ConclusionsAmong cardiology faculty at US medical schools, women were less likely than men to be full professors after accounting for several factors known to influence faculty rank.

Project description:ObjectivesFactors influencing the employment of pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellows in a career in academic medicine versus community emergency department (ED) settings have not previously been explored. The purpose of this study was to explore PEM fellows' priorities in selecting jobs and to identify factors that influence their decisions regarding career choices through a multicenter, qualitative approach. We also explored program directors' beliefs about graduates' job selection priorities.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study among a convenience sample of PEM fellows and PEM fellowship program directors and/or associate program directors in the United States. The data were collected in 2017, using a qualitative methodology known as free listing. The fellows and program directors were solicited through the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine. Using content analysis, all free-listing responses from participant samples were categorized into 14 distinct groupings. Thematic saturation was achieved, and member checking was performed to ensure trustworthiness.ResultsA sample of 63 fellows from six geographically diverse programs and 41 program and/or associate program directors were surveyed. Location, schedule/work-life balance and compensation were the most frequently cited factors taken into consideration for employment; these are not specific to PEM as a career choice. Other factors included patient population and ED resources. When deciding between academic and community employment, similar areas for the PEM physician emerged on both sides of the dichotomy: work-life balance, clinical hours, burnout, and acuity/patient complexity.ConclusionsThere are universal factors that PEM physicians consider when choosing employment. The information elicited from this exploratory technique can inform content for national survey or other qualitative work to achieve richer descriptions of reported items and dichotomies to guide fellow recruitment and retention strategies.

Project description:PurposeTo survey orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship program directors to determine the current research productivity of both fellows and faculty in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship programs in the United States.MethodsAn anonymous 18-question survey was distributed via e-mail to all 95 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship program directors in the United States. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. Questions included whether fellows are required to complete a certain number of projects during their fellowship year and whether fellows have protected research time.ResultsOf the programs, 31 (33%) responded to the survey. Twenty-four programs (80%) require fellows to complete 1 to 4 projects. Twenty-one programs (71%) provide 4 to 8 hours of weekly protected research time. Twenty-four programs (77%) publish 1 to 2 manuscripts per fellow during the fellowship. Twenty-two programs (71%) have fellows work on 1 to 2 projects at a time. Annually, 26 programs (84%) give 0 to 5 podium presentations, 24 (80%) present 0 to 5 posters, and 15 (48%) report 0 to 5 publications. Twenty-four programs (77%) have research fellows and/or assistants to help with research. The presence of dedicated research assistants and more than 25 annual fellowship program publications were found to be useful screening data for more than 2 and more than 4 average publications per fellow, respectively.ConclusionsThe research productivity of orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship programs may be an important consideration for applicants. Applicants who desire to be productive in research during their fellowship year should consider programs with dedicated research assistants and/or programs that publish more than 25 times annually.Clinical relevanceThis is a descriptive epidemiologic study that helps define the research productivity landscape in orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships. A more accurate understanding of sports medicine fellowship research experience may facilitate a better match between a program's research expectations and an applicant's research interests.

Project description:Twitter (recently renamed X) is used by academic anesthesiology departments as a social media platform for various purposes. We hypothesized that Twitter (X) use would be prevalent among academic anesthesiology departments and that the number of tweets would vary by region, physician faculty size, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) research funding rank. We performed a descriptive study of Twitter (X) use by academic anesthesiology departments (i.e. those with a residency program) in 2022. Original tweets were collected using a Twitter (X) analytics tool. Summary statistics were reported for tweet number and content. The median number of tweets was compared after stratifying by region, physician faculty size, and NIH funding rank. Among 166 academic anesthesiology departments, there were 73 (44.0%) that had a Twitter (X) account in 2022. There were 3,578 original tweets during the study period and the median number of tweets per department was 21 (25th-75th = 0, 75) with most tweets (55.8%) announcing general departmental news and a smaller number highlighting social events (12.5%), research (11.1%), recruiting (7.1%), DEI activities (5.2%), and trainee experiences (4.1%). There was no significant difference in the median number of tweets by region (P = 0.81). The median number of tweets differed significantly by physician faculty size (P<0.001) with larger departments tweeting more and also by NIH funding rank (P = 0.005) with highly funded departments tweeting more. In 2022, we found that less than half of academic anesthesiology departments had a Twitter (X) account, and the median number of annual tweets per account was relatively low. Overall, Twitter (X) use was less common than anticipated among academic anesthesiology departments and most tweets focused on promotion of departmental activities or individual faculty. There may be opportunities for more widespread and effective use of Twitter (X) by academic anesthesiology departments including education about anesthesiology as a specialty.

Project description:BackgroundThe role of residents as educators is increasingly recognized, since it impacts residents, interns, medical students and other healthcare professionals. A widespread implementation of resident-as-teacher courses in developed countries' medical schools has occurred, with variable results. There is a dearth of information about this theme in developing countries. The National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) Faculty of Medicine has more than 50% of the residency programs' physician population in Mexico. This report describes a needs assessment survey for a resident as teacher program at our institution.MethodsA cross-sectional descriptive survey was developed based on a review of the available literature and discussion by an expert multidisciplinary committee. The goal was to identify the residents' attitudes, academic needs and preferred educational strategies regarding resident-as-teacher activities throughout the residency. The survey was piloted and modified accordingly. The paper anonymous survey was sent to 7,685 residents, the total population of medical residents in UNAM programs in the country.ResultsThere was a 65.7% return rate (5,186 questionnaires), a broad and representative sample of the student population. The residents felt they had knowledge and were competent in medical education, but the majority felt a need to improve their knowledge and skills in this discipline. Most residents (92.5%) felt that their role as educators of medical students, interns and other residents was important/very important. They estimated that 45.5% of their learning came from other residents. Ninety percent stated that it was necessary to be trained in teaching skills. The themes identified to include in the educational intervention were mostly clinically oriented. The educational strategies in order of preference were interactive lectures with a professor, small groups with a moderator, material available in a website for self-learning, printed material for self-study and homework, and small group web-based learning.ConclusionsThere is a large unmet need to implement educational interventions to improve residents' educational skills in postgraduate educational programs in developing countries. Most perceived needs of residents are practical and clinically oriented, and they prefer traditional educational strategies. Resident as teachers educational interventions need to be designed taking into account local needs and resources.

Project description:BackgroundGender 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.DesignA 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.ParticipantsLeaders 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 measuresDescription and characteristics of leaders and programs including a multivariable analysis of gender of hospitalist leaders and the portion of female faculty.Key results59% 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.ConclusionThis 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.

Dataset Information

Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets