Collaborative biostatistics and epidemiology in academic medical centres: A survey to assess relationships with health researchers and ethical implications.

Abstract

The role of collaborative biostatisticians and epidemiologists in academic medical centers and how their degree type, supervisor type, and sex influences recognition and feelings of respect is poorly understood. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of self-identified biostatisticians and epidemiologists working in academic medical centers in the US or Canada. The survey was sent to 341 contacts at 125 institutions who were asked to forward the survey invitation to faculty and staff at their institution and posted on Community sections of the American Statistical Association website. Participants were asked a variety of questions including if they felt pressured to produce specific results, whether they had intellectual and ethical freedom to pursue appropriate use of statistical methods in collaborative research, and if they felt their contributions were appropriately recognized by collaborators. We received responses from 314 biostatisticians or related methodologists. A majority were female (59%), had a doctorate degree (52%), and reported a statistician or biostatistician supervisor (69%). Overall, most participants felt valued by their collaborators, but that they did not have sufficient calendar time to meet deadlines. Doctoral-level participants reported more autonomy in their collaborations than master's level participants. Females were less likely to feel recognized and respected compared to males. The survey results suggest that while most respondents felt valued by their collaborators, they have too many projects and need more time to critically review research. Further research is needed to understand why response differs by sex and how these responses fluctuate over time.