Thoughts on an academic endoscopy career.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chak A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6945137 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Understanding how institutional changes within academia may affect the overall potential of science requires a better quantitative representation of how careers evolve over time. Because knowledge spillovers, cumulative advantage, competition, and collaboration are distinctive features of the academic profession, both the employment relationship and the procedures for assigning recognition and allocating funding should be designed to account for these factors. We study the annual production n(i)(t) of a given scientist i by analyzing longitudinal career data for 200 leading scientists and 100 assistant professors from the physics community. Our empirical analysis of individual productivity dynamics shows that (i) there are increasing returns for the top individuals within the competitive cohort, and that (ii) the distribution of production growth is a leptokurtic "tent-shaped" distribution that is remarkably symmetric. Our methodology is general, and we speculate that similar features appear in other disciplines where academic publication is essential and collaboration is a key feature. We introduce a model of proportional growth which reproduces these two observations, and additionally accounts for the significantly right-skewed distributions of career longevity and achievement in science. Using this theoretical model, we show that short-term contracts can amplify the effects of competition and uncertainty making careers more vulnerable to early termination, not necessarily due to lack of individual talent and persistence, but because of random negative production shocks. We show that fluctuations in scientific production are quantitatively related to a scientist's collaboration radius and team efficiency.
| S-EPMC3325726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo review systematically the evidence about what factors influence the decision to choose or not choose a career in academic medicine.DesignA systematic review of relevant literature from 1990 to May 2005.Data sourcesSearches of The Cochrane Library, Medline (using Ovid and PubMed) from 1990 to May 2005, and EMBASE from 1990 to May 2005 were completed to identify relevant studies that explored the influential factors. Additional articles were identified from searching the bibliographies of retrieved articles.Selection of studiesWe attempted to identify studies that included residents, fellows, or staff physicians. No restrictions were placed on the study methodologies identified and all articles presenting empirical evidence were retrieved. For cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies, minimum inclusion criteria were the presence of defined groups, and the ability to extract relevant data. For surveys that involved case series, minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the population, and the availability of extractable data. Minimum inclusion criteria for qualitative studies were descriptions of the sampling strategy and methods.ResultsThe search identified 251 abstracts; 25 articles were included in this review. Completion of an MD with a graduate degree or fellowship program is associated with a career in academic medicine. Of the articles identified in this review, this finding is supported by the highest quality of evidence. Similarly, the completion of research and publication of this research in medical school and residency are associated with a career in academic medicine. The desire to teach, conduct research, and the intellectual stimulation and challenge provided in academia may also persuade people to choose this career path. The influence of a role model or a mentor was reported by physicians to impact their decision making. Trainees' interest in academic medicine wanes as they progress through their residency.ConclusionsIn order to revitalize academic medicine, we must engage trainees and retain their interest throughout their training. Research opportunities for medical students, and fellowships or graduate training can meet this challenge and influence career choice. Initiatives to stimulate and maintain interest in academic medicine should be evaluated in prospective studies across multiple sites.
| S-EPMC1924755 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is increasing evidence that science & engineering PhD students lose interest in an academic career over the course of graduate training. It is not clear, however, whether this decline reflects students being discouraged from pursuing an academic career by the challenges of obtaining a faculty job or whether it reflects more fundamental changes in students' career goals for reasons other than the academic labor market. We examine this question using a longitudinal survey that follows a cohort of PhD students from 39 U.S. research universities over the course of graduate training to document changes in career preferences and to explore potential drivers of such changes. We report two main results. First, although the vast majority of students start the PhD interested in an academic research career, over time 55% of all students remain interested while 25% lose interest entirely. In addition, 15% of all students were never interested in an academic career during their PhD program, while 5% become more interested. Thus, the declining interest in an academic career is not a general phenomenon across all PhD students, but rather reflects a divergence between those students who remain highly interested in an academic career and other students who are no longer interested in one. Second, we show that the decline we observe is not driven by expectations of academic job availability, nor by related factors such as postdoctoral requirements or the availability of research funding. Instead, the decline appears partly due to the misalignment between students' changing preferences for specific job attributes on the one hand, and the nature of the academic research career itself on the other. Changes in students' perceptions of their own research ability also play a role, while publications do not. We discuss implications for scientific labor markets, PhD career development programs, and science policy.
| S-EPMC5602526 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWithin the framework of a prospective cohort study of Swiss medical school graduates, a Career-Success Scale (CSS) was constructed in a sample of young physicians choosing different career paths in medicine. Furthermore the influence of personality factors, the participants' personal situation, and career related factors on their career success was investigated.Methods406 residents were assessed in terms of career aspired to, and their career progress. The Career-Success Scale, consisting of 7 items, was developed and validated, addressing objective criteria of academic career advancement. The influence of gender and career aspiration was investigated by a two-factorial analysis of variance, the relationships between personality factors, personal situation, career related factors and the Career-Success Scale by a multivariate linear regression analysis.ResultsThe unidimensional Career-Success Scale has an internal consistency of 0.76. It is significantly correlated at the bivariate level with gender, instrumentality, and all career related factors, particularly with academic career and received mentoring. In multiple regression, only gender, academic career, surgery as chosen specialty, and received mentoring are significant predictors. The highest values were observed in participants aspiring to an academic career, followed by those pursuing a hospital career and those wanting to run a private practice. Independent of the career aspired to, female residents have lower scores than their male colleagues.ConclusionThe Career-Success Scale proved to be a short, reliable and valid instrument to measure career achievements. As mentoring is an independent predictor of career success, mentoring programs could be an important instrument to specifically enhance careers of female physicians in academia.
| S-EPMC2442432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor students entering a science PhD program, a tenure-track faculty research position is often perceived as the ideal long-term goal. A relatively small percentage of individuals ultimately achieve this goal, however, with the vast majority of PhD recipients ultimately finding employment in industry or government positions. Given the disparity between academic career ambitions and outcomes, it is useful to understand factors that may predict those outcomes. Toward this goal, the current study examined employment status of PhD graduates from biomedical sciences programs at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (CU AMC) and related this to metrics of predoctoral publication records, as well as to other potentially important factors, such as sex and time-since-degree, to determine if these measures could predict career outcomes.MethodsDemographic information (name, PhD program, graduation date, sex) of CU AMC biomedical sciences PhD graduates between 2000 and 2015 was obtained from University records. Career outcomes (academic faculty vs. non-faculty) and predoctoral publication records (number and impact factors of first-author and non-first-author publications) were obtained via publicly available information. Relationships between predoctoral publication record and career outcomes were investigated by (a) comparing faculty vs. non-faculty publication metrics, using t-tests, and (b) investigating the ability of predoctoral publication record, sex, and time-since-degree to predict career outcomes, using logistic regression.ResultsSignificant faculty vs. non-faculty differences were observed in months since graduation (p < 0.001), first-author publication number (p = 0.001), average first-author impact factor (p = 0.006), and highest first-author impact factor (p = 0.004). With sex and months since graduation as predictors of career outcome, the logistic regression model was significant (p < 0.001), with both being male and having more months since graduation predicting career status. First-author related publication metrics (number of publications, average impact factor, highest impact factor) all significantly improved model fit (χ2 < 0.05 for all) and were all significant predictors of faculty status (p < 0.05 for all). Non-first-author publication metrics did not significantly improve model fit or predict faculty status.DiscussionResults suggest that while sex and months since graduation also predict career outcomes, a strong predoctoral first-author publication record may increase likelihood of obtaining an academic faculty research position. Compared to non-faculty, individuals employed in faculty positions produced more predoctoral first-author publications, with these being in journals with higher impact factors. Furthermore, first-author publication record, sex, and months since graduation were significant predictors of faculty status.
| S-EPMC6174868 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We analyzed and compared the decision-making processes underlying two approaches that academics might use to decide whether to pursue a professorship or an alternative career: academic coaching (a paid service that supports academics with career-related issues) and decision analysis (a method for applying decision theory to real-world decision problems). To this end, we conducted in-depth expert interviews with seven out of 11 academic coaches known to work in Berlin to examine empirically the career decision-making process that they use. Moreover, we demonstrate theoretically how decision analysis can be applied to an academic's hypothetical career choice problem. A comparison of the two approaches showed that they both advise (i) structuring the decision problem by dividing it into smaller components, (ii) using the academic's objectives to generate career alternatives, and (iii) quantifying the uncertainty of decision outcomes using subjective probabilities. Moreover, the observed differences in the way the two approaches structure the decision problem suggest ways in which they could inform each other: (i) they could make use of each other's techniques to help academics define their objectives and generate career alternatives; (ii) academic coaching could, in addition, use decision trees (a hallmark of decision analysis) to represent the structure of the career decision problem, and use simple measurement scales to quantify how much the career options contribute to the academic's objectives.
| S-EPMC6237325 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe future of academic medicine depends on attracting motivated trainees to the academic career path, but challenges to recruitment include unfamiliarity with academic career options.MethodsThis workshop comprises a didactic session with small-group case discussion to enable trainees to learn how to: (1) define academic medical center roles and responsibilities, (2) assess the alignment of academic medical center roles with personal goals and interests, and (3) identify factors that support an academic medicine career trajectory. Workshop evaluations were collected at five academic medicine conferences for medical students and residents held across the U.S.ResultsAmong the 139 conference participants who completed an evaluation form, the majority had a statistically significant increase in confidence regarding their building a foundation for a career in academic medicine, and in identifying an academic medicine career role aligning with their own personal and professional interests. The majority strongly agreed or agreed that the workshop objectives were met. Trainees reported that the workshop was "illuminating," "informative," and "educational."DiscussionImproved understanding of academic medicine career roles and responsibilities can increase trainees' awareness of the opportunities in academic medicine and may support development of the next generation of academic physicians.
| S-EPMC6338157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early-career academic cardiologists, who many believe are an important component of the future of cardiovascular care, face myriad challenges. The Early Career Section Academic Working Group of the American College of Cardiology, with senior leadership support, assessed the progress of this cohort from 2013 to 2016 with a global perspective. Data consisted of accessing National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute public information, data from the American Heart Association and international organizations, and a membership-wide survey. Although the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute increased funding of career development grants, only a small number of early-career American College of Cardiology members have benefited as funding of the entire cohort has decreased. Personal motivation, institutional support, and collaborators continued to be positive influential factors. Surprisingly, mentoring ceased to correlate positively with obtaining external grants. The totality of findings suggests that the status of early-career academic cardiologists remains challenging; therefore, the authors recommend a set of attainable solutions.
| S-EPMC5665176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMentorship is essential for students considering a future in academic medicine. Mentoring is recognized as one of the most important factors in determining career success through enhancing trainees' goals and productivity. An effective mentoring relationship can drive trainees' goals to fruition by providing support so that opportunistic risk can be taken and failures can be reevaluated into learning experiences. Mentorship has such importance that it was deemed mandatory in education by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Moreover, mentoring can play a significant role in helping to diversify the academic medicine workforce.MethodsThis 60-minute workshop utilizes a didactic PowerPoint presentation and small-group role-play exercise to introduce participants to the importance of mentoring in the development of academic medicine careers and to provide instruction on establishing effective meetings with prospective mentors. Faculty facilitated the workshop at nine regional academic medicine conferences held across the country.ResultsEighty-seven diverse participants completed an evaluation form. In comparing pre- and postworkshop responses, there was a statistically significant increase in confidence to "Find a mentor for a career in academic medicine" (2.29 vs. 3.26, p < .001) and "Have a successful relationship with an academic medicine mentor" (2.52 vs. 3.38, p < .001). Moreover, more than 85% agreed or strongly agreed that the workshop's learning objectives were met.DiscussionTrainees from diverse backgrounds gained crucial insight into the importance of mentorship and techniques on how to establish and maintain mentors while pursuing an academic medicine career.
| S-EPMC6342371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Over the last decades there has been a decline in the recruitment of medical students into academia in all medical fields. Concurrently, medical research has increasingly included other disciplines in multidisciplinary convergence, introducing an unmet recruitment gap and requirement for medical researchers. To counteract the trend and recruit students to academic medicine, a national intercalated Medical Student Research Program (MSRP) was established in Norway in 2002. A preliminary evaluation in 2009 suggested that the MSRP had resulted in recruitment, but could not conclude on a lasting effect beyond graduation in a study that did not include any controls. These results led us to hypothesize that the MSRP could increase the number of PhD degrees and attract medical students towards academic medicine. Adopting a case cohort design, we here report that the intercalated MSRP had a significant impact of the throughput of physician-scientists to PhD, by increasing the rate of PhD completion 10-fold (p<0.001). Moreover, almost twice as many MSRP physicians reported an academic aspiration (49% vs 22%, p<0.001). Results suggested that an MSRP-like approach could efficiently address the unmet recruitment gap and strengthen the medical disciplines in medical research.
| S-EPMC5927424 | biostudies-other