Literature DB >> 27257706

Is there an impending loss of academically productive trauma surgical faculty? An analysis of 4,015 faculty.

Nakul P Valsangkar1, Casi Blanton, John S Mayo, Grace S Rozycki, Teresa M Bell, Teresa A Zimmers, David V Feliciano, Leonidas G Koniaris.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to compare the academic impact of trauma surgery faculty relative to faculty in general surgery and other surgery subspecialties.
METHODS: Scholarly metrics were determined for 4,015 faculty at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded university-based departments and five hospital-based surgery departments.
RESULTS: Overall, 317 trauma surgical faculty (8.2%) were identified. This compared to 703 other general surgical faculty (18.2%) and 2,830 other subspecialty surgical faculty (73.5%). The average size of the trauma surgical division was six faculty. Overall, 43% were assistant professors, 29% were associate professors, and 28% were full professors, while 3.1% had PhD, 2.5% had MD and PhD, and, 16.3% were division chiefs/directors. Compared with general surgery, there were no differences regarding faculty academic levels or leadership positions. Other surgical specialties had more full professors (39% vs. 28%; p < 0.05) and faculty with research degrees (PhD, 7.7%; and MD and PhD, 5.7%). Median publications/citations were lower, especially for junior trauma surgical faculty (T) compared with general surgery (G) and other (O) surgical specialties: assistant professors (T, 9 publications/76 citations vs. G, 13/138, and O, 18/241; p < 0.05), associate professors (T, 22/351 vs. G, 36/700, and O, 47/846; p < 0.05), and professors (T, 88/2,234 vs. G, 93/2193; p = NS [not significant for either publications/citations] and O, 99/2425; p = NS). Publications/Citations for division chiefs/directors were comparable with other specialties: T, 77/1,595 vs. G, 103/2,081 and O, 74/1,738; p = NS, but were lower for all nonchief faculty; T, 23/368 vs. G, 30/528 and O, 37/658; p < 0.05. Trauma surgical faculty were less likely to have current or former NIH funding than other surgical specialties (17 % vs. 27%; p < 0.05), and this included a lower rate of R01/U01/P01 funding (5.5% vs. 10.8%; p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Senior trauma surgical faculty are as academically productive as other general surgical faculty and other surgical specialists. Junior trauma faculty, however, publish at a lower rate than other general surgery or subspecialty faculty. Causes of decreased academic productivity and lower NIH funding must be identified, understood, and addressed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27257706     DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg        ISSN: 2163-0755            Impact factor:   3.313


  4 in total

1.  National Cancer Institute Centers and Society of Surgical Oncology Cancer Research Synergy.

Authors:  Bradford J Kim; Subhasis Misra; Herbert Chen; Teresa M Bell; Leonidas G Koniaris; Nakul P Valsangkar
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2018-12-07       Impact factor: 2.192

2.  Endangered academia: preserving the pediatric surgeon scientist.

Authors:  Troy A Markel; Nakul P Valsangkar; Teresa M Bell; Brandon A Kiel; Teresa A Zimmers; Leonidas G Koniaris
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 2.545

3.  An Assessment of the Academic Impact of Shock Society Members.

Authors:  Daniel P Milgrom; Leonidas G Koniaris; Nakul P Valsangkar; Neha Lad; Teresa M Bell; Brandon Wojcik; Teresa A Zimmers
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  Surgical research in Canada: How can we re-ignite the pilot light?

Authors:  Chad G. Ball; Edward Harvey
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 2.089

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.