Shooka Esmaeeli, Michelle Seu, Jennifer Akin, Parvin Nejatmahmoodalilioo, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic
{"title":"项目主管研究效率和其他因素麻醉住院医师项目与项目邻近度排名。","authors":"Shooka Esmaeeli, Michelle Seu, Jennifer Akin, Parvin Nejatmahmoodalilioo, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic","doi":"10.46374/volxxiii_issue2_knezevic","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Program directors (PDs) play a crucial role in the competitiveness of the residency selection process and in mentoring the next generation of physicians. With this mandate comes the need to evaluate PDs on their own academic performance. We aimed to evaluate the distinguishing characteristics of anesthesiology residency programs with a focus on academic productivity of PDs and to investigate how these characteristics affect the Doximity program rank.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified anesthesiology program rankings from 2019 Doximity standings and divided them into quartiles (Q1-Q4). PD academic history and bibliometric indices (H-index, number of publications and citations) were collected through program websites, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) websites.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 152 active anesthesiology programs and PDs were identified across the United States. Among the 152 PDs, 32% (n = 49) were women and 68% (n = 103) were men. There were differences between the Q1 versus Q2 programs in all of the variables other than PDs' number of fellowships. However, Q2 versus Q3 and Q3 versus Q4 programs had fewer identified differences. Each of the assessed PDs' bibliometric indices showed weak correlation with the program rank; however, there were stronger correlated factors of program rank, such as the program's original ACGME accreditation date (rs = 0.5, <i>P</i> < .0001) and female resident percentage (rs = 0.36, <i>P</i> < .0001) with moderate positive correlation. Additionally, the program size (rs = 0.77, <i>P</i> < .0001) and the number of ACGME-approved fellowships provided by the program (rs = 0.75, <i>P</i> < .0001) had a very strong positive correlation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that program rank in the growing field of anesthesiology correlates with program size, female residents' percentage, ACGME approval date, number of ACGME-approved fellowships, as well as PDs' research productivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":75067,"journal":{"name":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","volume":"23 2","pages":"E662"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8168568/pdf/i2333-0406-23-2-Knezevic.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Program Directors Research Productivity and Other Factors of Anesthesiology Residency Programs That Relate to Program Doximity Ranking.\",\"authors\":\"Shooka Esmaeeli, Michelle Seu, Jennifer Akin, Parvin Nejatmahmoodalilioo, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic\",\"doi\":\"10.46374/volxxiii_issue2_knezevic\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Program directors (PDs) play a crucial role in the competitiveness of the residency selection process and in mentoring the next generation of physicians. With this mandate comes the need to evaluate PDs on their own academic performance. We aimed to evaluate the distinguishing characteristics of anesthesiology residency programs with a focus on academic productivity of PDs and to investigate how these characteristics affect the Doximity program rank.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified anesthesiology program rankings from 2019 Doximity standings and divided them into quartiles (Q1-Q4). PD academic history and bibliometric indices (H-index, number of publications and citations) were collected through program websites, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) websites.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 152 active anesthesiology programs and PDs were identified across the United States. Among the 152 PDs, 32% (n = 49) were women and 68% (n = 103) were men. There were differences between the Q1 versus Q2 programs in all of the variables other than PDs' number of fellowships. However, Q2 versus Q3 and Q3 versus Q4 programs had fewer identified differences. Each of the assessed PDs' bibliometric indices showed weak correlation with the program rank; however, there were stronger correlated factors of program rank, such as the program's original ACGME accreditation date (rs = 0.5, <i>P</i> < .0001) and female resident percentage (rs = 0.36, <i>P</i> < .0001) with moderate positive correlation. Additionally, the program size (rs = 0.77, <i>P</i> < .0001) and the number of ACGME-approved fellowships provided by the program (rs = 0.75, <i>P</i> < .0001) had a very strong positive correlation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that program rank in the growing field of anesthesiology correlates with program size, female residents' percentage, ACGME approval date, number of ACGME-approved fellowships, as well as PDs' research productivity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM\",\"volume\":\"23 2\",\"pages\":\"E662\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8168568/pdf/i2333-0406-23-2-Knezevic.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiii_issue2_knezevic\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiii_issue2_knezevic","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
背景:项目主任(pd)在住院医师选择过程中的竞争力和指导下一代医生方面发挥着至关重要的作用。有了这一授权,就需要根据pd自己的学习成绩来评估他们。我们的目的是评估麻醉住院医师项目的显著特征,重点关注pd的学术生产力,并调查这些特征如何影响Doximity项目排名。方法:我们从2019年的Doximity排名中选取麻醉专业排名,并将其分为四分位数(Q1-Q4)。通过项目网站、PubMed、Scopus、Google Scholar和研究生医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)网站收集PD的学术历史和文献计量指标(h指数、发表论文数和被引次数)。结果:美国共有152个活跃麻醉项目和pd被确定。在152例pd中,32% (n = 49)为女性,68% (n = 103)为男性。除了博士的奖学金数量外,Q1和Q2项目在所有变量上都存在差异。然而,Q2项目与Q3项目、Q3项目与Q4项目的差异较小。各被评pd的文献计量指标与项目排名呈弱相关;而项目排名的相关因素较强,如项目最初的ACGME认证日期(rs = 0.5, P < 0.0001)和女性常驻比例(rs = 0.36, P < 0.0001)呈中等正相关。此外,项目规模(rs = 0.77, P < 0.0001)与项目提供的acgme批准的奖学金数量(rs = 0.75, P < 0.0001)具有非常强的正相关。结论:本研究表明,麻醉学成长领域的专业排名与专业规模、女性住院医师比例、ACGME批准日期、ACGME批准的奖学金数量以及pd的研究生产力相关。
Program Directors Research Productivity and Other Factors of Anesthesiology Residency Programs That Relate to Program Doximity Ranking.
Background: Program directors (PDs) play a crucial role in the competitiveness of the residency selection process and in mentoring the next generation of physicians. With this mandate comes the need to evaluate PDs on their own academic performance. We aimed to evaluate the distinguishing characteristics of anesthesiology residency programs with a focus on academic productivity of PDs and to investigate how these characteristics affect the Doximity program rank.
Methods: We identified anesthesiology program rankings from 2019 Doximity standings and divided them into quartiles (Q1-Q4). PD academic history and bibliometric indices (H-index, number of publications and citations) were collected through program websites, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) websites.
Results: A total of 152 active anesthesiology programs and PDs were identified across the United States. Among the 152 PDs, 32% (n = 49) were women and 68% (n = 103) were men. There were differences between the Q1 versus Q2 programs in all of the variables other than PDs' number of fellowships. However, Q2 versus Q3 and Q3 versus Q4 programs had fewer identified differences. Each of the assessed PDs' bibliometric indices showed weak correlation with the program rank; however, there were stronger correlated factors of program rank, such as the program's original ACGME accreditation date (rs = 0.5, P < .0001) and female resident percentage (rs = 0.36, P < .0001) with moderate positive correlation. Additionally, the program size (rs = 0.77, P < .0001) and the number of ACGME-approved fellowships provided by the program (rs = 0.75, P < .0001) had a very strong positive correlation.
Conclusion: This study shows that program rank in the growing field of anesthesiology correlates with program size, female residents' percentage, ACGME approval date, number of ACGME-approved fellowships, as well as PDs' research productivity.