Santiago A Lopez1, Peter F Svider2, Poonam Misra1, Neelakshi Bhagat1, Paul D Langer1, Jean Anderson Eloy3. 1. Institute of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. 2. Institute of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. 3. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey; Department of Neurological Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey; Center for Skull Base and Pituitary Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. Electronic address: jean.anderson.eloy@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In recent years, gender differences in academic promotion have been documented within surgical fields. To the best of our knowledge, gender discrepancies in association with scholarly productivity have not been well assessed among academic ophthalmologists. Because research productivity is strongly associated with academic career advancement, we sought to determine whether gender differences in scholarly impact, measured by the h-index, exist among academic ophthalmologists. DESIGN: Academic rank and gender were determined using faculty listings from academic ophthalmology departments. h-index and publication experience (in years) of faculty members were determined using the Scopus database. SETTING: Academic medical center. RESULTS: From assistant professor through professor, the h-index increased with subsequent academic rank (p < 0.001), although between chairpersons and professors no statistical difference was found (p > 0.05). Overall, men had higher h-indices (h = 10.4 ± 0.34 standard error of mean) than women (h = 6.0 ± 0.38 standard error of mean), a finding that was only statistically significant among assistant professors in a subgroup analysis. Women were generally underrepresented among senior positions. When controlling for publication range (i.e., length of time publishing), men had higher h-indices among those with 1 to 10 years of publication experience (p < 0.0001), whereas women had scholarly impact equivalent to and even exceeding that of men later in their careers. CONCLUSION: Women in academic ophthalmology continue to be underrepresented among senior faculty. Although women surpass men in scholarly productivity during the later stages of their careers, low scholarly impact during the earlier stages may impede academic advancement and partly explain the gender disparity in senior academic positions.
OBJECTIVES: In recent years, gender differences in academic promotion have been documented within surgical fields. To the best of our knowledge, gender discrepancies in association with scholarly productivity have not been well assessed among academic ophthalmologists. Because research productivity is strongly associated with academic career advancement, we sought to determine whether gender differences in scholarly impact, measured by the h-index, exist among academic ophthalmologists. DESIGN: Academic rank and gender were determined using faculty listings from academic ophthalmology departments. h-index and publication experience (in years) of faculty members were determined using the Scopus database. SETTING: Academic medical center. RESULTS: From assistant professor through professor, the h-index increased with subsequent academic rank (p < 0.001), although between chairpersons and professors no statistical difference was found (p > 0.05). Overall, men had higher h-indices (h = 10.4 ± 0.34 standard error of mean) than women (h = 6.0 ± 0.38 standard error of mean), a finding that was only statistically significant among assistant professors in a subgroup analysis. Women were generally underrepresented among senior positions. When controlling for publication range (i.e., length of time publishing), men had higher h-indices among those with 1 to 10 years of publication experience (p < 0.0001), whereas women had scholarly impact equivalent to and even exceeding that of men later in their careers. CONCLUSION:Women in academic ophthalmology continue to be underrepresented among senior faculty. Although women surpass men in scholarly productivity during the later stages of their careers, low scholarly impact during the earlier stages may impede academic advancement and partly explain the gender disparity in senior academic positions.
Authors: John M McClellan; Neel Mansukhani; Donald Moe; Michael Derickson; Stephen Chiu; Melina R Kibbe; Matthew J Martin Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Sara P Myers; Katherine M Reitz; Charles B Wessel; Matthew D Neal; Jennifer A Corbelli; Leslie R M Hausmann; Matthew R Rosengart Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2018-12-03 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Sarah Chauvin; Benoit H Mulsant; Sanjeev Sockalingam; Vicky Stergiopoulos; Valerie H Taylor; Simone N Vigod Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Jean Anderson Eloy; Michael Bobian; Peter F Svider; Ashley Culver; Bianca Siegel; Stacey T Gray; Soly Baredes; Sujana S Chandrasekhar; Adam J Folbe Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: M Ahmadi; K Khurshid; P C Sanelli; S Jalal; T Chahal; A Norbash; S Nicolaou; M Castillo; F Khosa Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Mona L Camacci; Amy Lu; Erik B Lehman; Ingrid U Scott; Esther Bowie; Seth M Pantanelli Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Mckenzee Chiam; Mona L Camacci; Erik B Lehman; Michael C Chen; Gargi K Vora; Seth M Pantanelli Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Jayanth Sridhar; Ajay E Kuriyan; Yoshihiro Yonekawa; Audina Berrocal; M Ali Khan; R V Paul Chan; Julia A Haller Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 5.258