Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017)最新文献

Background  In 2017, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education announced all ophthalmology residency programs would provide a combined transitional or joint preliminary program for first postgraduate year (PGY-1) residents, with mandatory implementation by 2023. Purpose  This study aimed to survey ophthalmology residency program directors, postgraduate year 2 (PGY-2) ophthalmology residents who were a part of the first, official combined ophthalmology PGY-1 year, and postgraduate year 3 (PGY-3) residents who were a PGY-1 resident the year prior to integration to evaluate characteristics and perspectives on the combined ophthalmology PGY-1 year. Methods  A national, internet survey-based study approved by the Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology (AUPO) was disseminated to the AUPO listserv of program directors (PDs) and PGY-2 and PGY-3 ophthalmology residents from July to August 2022 and then again April to June 2023. Results  Twenty-six PDs completed the survey (response rate 20.3% out of 128 PDs). Forty-one PGY-2 ophthalmology residents who underwent the combined ophthalmology PGY-1 year and 33 PGY-3 ophthalmology residents also completed the survey. Most PGY-1 curricula focused on exposure to comprehensive ophthalmology and provided indirect ophthalmoscope, slit lamp, and refraction skills training to residents. Early exposure to fundamentals and clinical workflows were commonly cited benefits to the integration. When PDs were surveyed about how well-prepared PGY-1 residents who went through the combined year are for the PGY-2 relative to the prior year's class, 16 (61.5%) responded "better prepared." PGY-2 residents also reported a relatively higher level of clinical preparedness and familiarity with ophthalmology co-residents than PGY-3 residents. Several areas of improvement cited by both PDs and residents were identified including a dedicated didactic curriculum and more time in ophthalmology during the PGY-1 year. Conclusions  We found an overall net benefit from the integration of the combined ophthalmology PGY-1 year. Benefits include early exposure to clinical skills and knowledge specific to ophthalmology, leading to increased confidence and preparedness for the rigorous transition to ophthalmology residency. We also identified many areas for improvement to optimize the PGY-1 year including a formal curriculum and additional time in ophthalmology. Programs should work closely with their residents, faculty, and non-ophthalmology PDs to refine the PGY-1 for the benefit of future ophthalmologists.

Background  Social determinants of health play a critical role in visual health outcomes. Yet, there exists no structured curriculum for ophthalmology residents to identify and address health disparities relevant to eye care or no a standard assessment of health disparities education within ophthalmology residency programs. This study aims to characterize current health disparity curricula in ophthalmology residency programs in the United States, determine resident confidence in addressing health disparities in the clinical setting, and identify perceived barriers and needs of program directors (PDs) and residents in this area. Design  This was a cross-sectional survey study. Methods  A closed-ended questionnaire with comments was distributed to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited ophthalmology residency PDs and residents in April 2021 and May 2022. The questionnaire solicited characteristics of any existing health disparity curricula, PD and resident perceptions of these curricula, and residents' experience with and confidence in addressing health disparities in the delivery of patient care. Results  In total, 29 PDs and 96 residents responded. Sixty-six percent of PDs stated their program had a formal curriculum compared to fifty-three percent of residents. Forty-one percent of PDs and forty-one percent of residents stated their program places residents in underserved care settings for more than 50% of their training. Most residents (72%) were confident in recognizing health disparities. Sixty-six percent were confident in managing care in the face of disparities and fifty-nine percent felt they know how to utilize available resources. Residents were most concerned with the lack of access to resources to help patients. Forty-five percent of PDs felt the amount of time dedicated to health disparities education was adequate. Forty-nine percent of residents reported they felt the amount of training they received on health disparities to be adequate. The top barrier to curriculum development identified by PDs was the availability of trained faculty to teach. Time in the curriculum was a major barrier identified by residents. Conclusions  Roughly half of ophthalmology residency programs who responded had a health disparity curriculum; however, both PDs and residents felt inadequate time is dedicated to such education. National guidance on structured health disparity curricula for ophthalmology residents may be warranted as a next step.

Purpose  Despite easing restrictions on social distancing and travel since the beginning of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, virtual interviews remain a widely used format for ophthalmology fellowship interviews. This study aims to evaluate the relative benefits and drawbacks of in-person versus virtual interviews during a cycle where both formats were prevalent. Methods  A prospective cross-sectional study surveyed all fellowship applicants ( N  = 311) who applied to Wills Eye Hospital and Bascom Palmer Eye Institute during the 2022 to 2023 application cycle. Results  A total of 59 (19%) applicants responded to the survey, with the majority being male (53.0%) and between the ages of 20 and 35 (91.3%). There was no statistically significant difference between the number of virtual and in-person interviews attended or the total number of interviews attended. The highest ranked limitations of the virtual interview process were limited exposure to details of the program structure, limited opportunity to exhibit applicants' strengths to the program, and limited exposure to the fellows. The highest ranked strengths were less pressure during interviews, greater scheduling flexibility, and ability to interview at more fellowship programs. The highest ranked limitations of the in-person interview process were more pressure during interviews, inability to interview at all desired fellowship programs, and decreased scheduling flexibility. The highest ranked strengths based on median rankings were greater exposure to details of the program structure, greater ability to exhibit an applicant's strengths to the program, and greater exposure to the geographic location/city. Conclusion  While both in-person and virtual interviews have their own benefits and limitations, virtual interviews appear to be more cost-effective and time-efficient while in-person interviews provide better opportunities to assess program fit and culture. A hybrid format that combines the ideal aspects of both formats may be an optimal solution.

Background  Gap years following medical school graduation have become more common, but research into their tangible career benefit is lacking. Examining the impact of gap years on resident scholarly productivity in ophthalmology may provide insight generalizable to all specialties. Objective  To evaluate whether a gap year following medical school graduation significantly predicts scholarly productivity during ophthalmology residency. Methods  In December 2021, residents were recorded from 110 publicly available American ophthalmology residency program webpages. They were included if educational history was listed on publicly accessible academic and social media profiles. Residents were then stratified into gap year and nongap year cohorts. Publication data were recorded from Scopus and PubMed. Pearson's chi-square, independent sample t -tests, and multivariable regression were performed. Results  A total of 1,206 residents were analyzed, with 1,036 (85.9%) residents taking no gap year and 170 (14.1%) residents with at least one gap year. Gap year residents were predicted to have increase in the likelihoods of publishing at least one, two, or five total articles during residency, in addition to at least one article in a high-impact journal. There was no significant relationship between gap years and publications with senior authors affiliated with either the resident's medical school or residency program. Conclusion  Residents taking gap years following graduation may publish more during residency, but these publications are not associated with senior authors at their institutions. Future investigations should continue to evaluate the significance of gap years in medical education.

Purpose  To identify the top 100 (T100) cited articles on ophthalmic education and examine trends and areas of focus in ophthalmic education. Methods  A literature search was conducted for articles published between 2011 and 2021 related to ophthalmic education within ophthalmology journals using the ISI Web of Science Core Collection database. The search was performed in June 2022 and was conducted using the search phrase ([educat* OR teach* OR instruct* OR train* OR "medical student*" OR residen* OR fellow* OR undergrad* OR postgrad* OR "faculty" OR "attending"] AND *ophthalm*). Results were analyzed using VOSviewer v.1.6.18 and statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel. Results  The majority of articles were published in the Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (19%), followed by Ophthalmology (12%), and Eye (12%). Articles were most often published in the year 2013 (15%), followed by 2014 (12%) and 2012 (12%). Articles most commonly originated from English-speaking countries, including the United States (43%), England (14%), Canada (8%), and India (8%). Topics most often examined in ophthalmic education were resident education (51%), medical school education (21%), and surgical training (21%). The most common study types were cohort studies (22%), case series (21%), and prospective trials (16%). There were 16 institutions that produced more than one article in the T100 articles list. Conclusion  The T100 articles on ophthalmic education were primarily U.S. based and focused on resident education, surgical training, and medical school ophthalmic curriculum. Further research into ophthalmic education is warranted to establish evidence-based curricula guidelines.

Introduction:  This study aims to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT-4, an advanced artificial intelligence (AI) language model, on the Ophthalmology Knowledge Assessment Program (OKAP) examination compared to its predecessor, ChatGPT-3.5. Methods:  Both models were tested on 180 OKAP practice questions covering various ophthalmology subject categories. Results:  ChatGPT-4 significantly outperformed ChatGPT-3.5 (81% vs. 57%; p <0.001), indicating improvements in medical knowledge assessment. Discussion:  The superior performance of ChatGPT-4 suggests potential applicability in ophthalmologic education and clinical decision support systems. Future research should focus on refining AI models, ensuring a balanced representation of fundamental and specialized knowledge, and determining the optimal method of integrating AI into medical education and practice.

Purpose  Physician diversity is limited in ophthalmology and oculofacial plastic surgery. Determination of barriers within the application process for oculofacial plastic surgery may help target efforts to improve the recruitment of underrepresented groups. This study aimed to illuminate perceived barriers to increasing diversity in oculofacial plastic surgery trainees, according to the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) fellows and fellowship program directors (FPDs). Methods  During the month of February 2021, we sent surveys out to 54 current oculofacial plastic surgery fellows and 56 FPDs at 56 oculofacial plastic surgery programs recognized by the ASOPRS nationwide using a 15-question Qualtrics survey. Results  Sixty-three individuals (57%) responded to the survey: 34 fellows (63%) and 29 FPDs (52%). Eighty-eight percent of fellows and 68% of FPDs identified as non-underrepresented in medicine (UiM). Forty-four percent of fellows and 25% of FPDs identified as men. FPDs most commonly noted, "Not enough minorities applying to our program" and "The objective data (Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program score, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step scores, clinical honors, Alpha Omega Alpha status, letter of recommendation) for minority applicants often do not meet the threshold required to offer an interview or to be ranked to match" as barriers. Among fellows, the lowest-rated considerations when applying to oculofacial plastic surgery were "Racially/ethnically diverse faculty" and "Perceptions of minority candidates by fellowship programs," whereas "Likelihood of matching in program of choice" was ranked highest in considerations. Fellows identifying as men indicated greater concern for "Financial factors related to fellowship (e.g., loans, salary, cost of living, or cost of interviewing)" compared to fellows identifying as women who noted greater concern for "Program or preceptor acceptance of starting or having a family during fellowship." Conclusion  Responses from FPDs suggest that efforts focused on recruiting and supporting diverse students to medicine and ophthalmology, mentoring applicants interested in oculofacial plastic surgery, and restructuring the application process to decrease bias, may improve diversity within the subspecialty. The lack of UiM representation in this study, 6% fellows and 7.4% FPDs identified as UiM, shows both the stark underrepresentation and the need for further research into this topic.

Background  The extent and impact of ophthalmology resident scholarly output is not well known. The authors aim to quantify scholarly activity of ophthalmology residents during residency and assess what factors may be associated with greater research productivity of these residents. Material and Methods  Ophthalmology residents who graduated in 2021 were identified from their respective program Web sites. Bibliometric data published by these residents between the beginning of their postgraduate year 2 (July 1, 2018) until 3 months after graduation (September 30, 2021) were captured through searches via PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The association of the following factors with greater research productivity numbers was analyzed: residency tier, medical school rank, sex, doctorate degree, type of medical degree, and international medical graduate status. Results  We found 418 ophthalmology residents from 98 residency programs. These residents published a mean (±standard deviation [SD]) number of 2.68 ± 3.81 peer-reviewed publications, 2.39 ± 3.40 ophthalmology-related publications, and 1.18 ± 1.96 first-author publications each. The mean (±SD) Hirsch index (h-index) for this cohort was 0.79 ± 1.17. Upon multivariate analysis, we discovered significant correlations between both residency tier and medical school rank and all bibliometric variables assessed. Pairwise comparisons revealed that residents from higher tier programs had greater research productivity numbers than those from lower tier programs. Conclusion  We obtained bibliometric standards for ophthalmology residents on a national scale. Residents who graduated from higher-ranked residency programs and medical schools possessed higher h-indices and published more peer-reviewed publications, ophthalmology-related articles, and first-author publications.