Department Chairs Research Articles

Flood Management: Solving Conformance or Sweep Efficiency Problems—Part 4: Solution Performance Analysis

The first three articles in this series have discussed problem identification, problem understanding; solution design, execution, and performance; and benefit methods and techniques that should help in our efforts to improve the solution success rate, but we still have further improvements to make. Part 4 provides an overview of ongoing research and recent technology improvements focused on improving sweep efficiency or conformance solutions taking place in both academia and the service industry within the US. This article does not review efforts taking place inside oil production companies or national oil companies as that work is generally not publicized until completed. Before we start this review, let’s capture some thoughts that were expressed by several department chairs and other leaders in the industry. There is a common feeling that the level of research activity on all conventional oilfield recovery problems has suffered from a change in interest and funding over the past 10 to 15 years. Research on conformance or sweep efficiency problems is a subset of conventional oilfield recovery issues and thus has also suffered from this reduced interest. Instead, a significant rise of unconventional oilfield recovery needs and focus on greenhouse gases (GHG), carbon footprint, and the energy industry transition has shifted the priorities at many universities, governments, and service providers. This shift in efforts has resulted in a significant redistribution of resources that were once focused on conventional oilfield recovery issues. The number and types of conventional oilfield recovery problems has not changed; if anything, they continue to grow, but the addition of unconventional resources and their unique character, along with the push for studies on GHG, carbon footprint, and energy transition without a corresponding increase in funding and manpower has diluted our ability to respond as an industry to these needs. This perspective is offered as a simple observation of conditions that exist in the energy research arena. No judgment is made on the appropriateness of this change or the overall situation. Simply be aware that as an industry we have many challenges to face in the future and some will suffer as others are prioritized. As a result of this and some other reasons, several universities such as Colorado School of Mines, Louisiana State University, Penn State, Stanford University, University of Houston, University of Southern California, The University of Tulsa, and University of Wyoming are not reporting any active or current efforts on conventional asset sweep efficiency or conformance solution research. This does not mean that all interest in these technologies has been lost, only that no current research activities are underway. This is unfortunate, but I believe it is representative of this industry shift. Now, back to the primary focus of this article.

Communicating with Your Department Chair: A Primer on How to Advocate for Your IR Section.

Many interventional radiologists express concern about communicating their practice needs to their radiology department chairs. As a result, they may have difficulty getting support for hiring of additional physicians and staff, capital investments in equipment, and marketing of IR services. Some perceive that chairs have a preference for diagnostic radiology initiatives over interventional and want to know why. More importantly, they want to know how to approach their chair and succeed in their advocacy for IR. The key to success is understanding the perspective of the chair and the pressures and demands they face. That understanding allows the IR to propose their initiatives in a form that helps address some of the chair's needs and thus eases their path to success.

Perception of Race and Sex Diversity in Ophthalmology by Artificial Intelligence: A DALL E-2 Study.

In the past few years, there has been remarkable progress in accessibility of open-source artificial intelligence (AI) image generators, developed to help humans understand how AI sees our world. Here, we characterize perception of racial and sex diversity in ophthalmology by AI. OpenAI's open-source DALL E-2 AI was used for image generation of ophthalmologists with queries that all included "American" and "portrait photo". Factors used for queries contained categories of following: "Positive Characteristic", "Negative Characteristic", "Finances", "Region", "Experience", "Academic Rank", and "Subspecialty". The first 40 faces for each search were categorized on the basis of race and sex by two independent reviewers. If race or sex was not agreed upon, a third reviewer independently provided a classification, or if still indeterminate, the image was labeled as such. Images that did not adequately show facial features were excluded from categorization. A total of 1560 images were included in the analysis. Control search queries specifying solely ophthalmologist sex and/or race outputted (100%) accurate images validating the tool. The query "American ophthalmologist, portrait photo" portrayed the majority of ophthalmologists as White (75%) and male (77.5%). Young/inexperienced/amateur ophthalmologists were perceived to have greater non-White racial diversity (27.5%) and female representation (28.3%) relative to old/experienced/mature ophthalmologists (23.3% non-White and 18.3% female). Ophthalmology department chairs (25%) had slightly more racial diversity compared to residents (22.5%), but residents had greater female representation (30%) compared to chairs (15%). Our results suggest the DALL E-2 AI may perceive a trend of increasing racial and sex diversity in younger, newer ophthalmologists compared to more senior ophthalmologists. Future investigations should attempt to validate how AI may be used as a tool to evaluate ophthalmology's progress towards becoming more inclusive of increasingly diverse ophthalmologists.

Diversity Within the Field of Orthopedic Sports Medicine: A Systematic Review.

Orthopedic surgery is among the least diverse specialties in medicine. This systematic review analyzes gender, racial, and ethnic diversity within orthopedic sports medicine and aims to raise awareness and provide guidance for future strategies that support underrepresented minorities in medicine (URMs) and women in joining the orthopedic sports medicine workforce. We hypothesize that at all tiers of training, there is a lack of gender, racial, and ethnic parity in academic rank, leadership positions, and research productivity. A search of all published literature in the English language from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases, between January 1, 2010, and August 18, 2023, was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Included studies presented demographics regarding diversity within orthopedic sports medicine and provided trends in applicants, attendings, leadership, and/or research. Bias was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) study checklist. Thirteen studies published between 2016 and 2023 with STROBE scores 15.5 to 21.5 (70.5% to 97.7%) met criteria, and pertinent data were extracted. The percent of female orthopedic sports medicine surgeons from 2010 to 2019 increased from 5% (n = 138) to 6% (n = 206) with a compound annual growth rate of 0.2% (r2 = 0.97; p < 0.001). Females and URMs are underrepresented at the highest levels of orthopedic sports medicine leadership including department chair (female: 0% [n = 0]), division chief (female: 4% [n = 4]; URM: 3% [n = 3]), and fellowship director (female: 3.3% [n = 3]; URM: 4.4% [n = 4]). Studies from prominent orthopedic sports medicine journals (American Journal of Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, and Sports Health) show a 12.1% increase in female involvement in orthopedic sports medicine research from 1972 to 2018; however, this increase captures 59.3% (n = 2,953) females with degrees other than an MD. Although increasingly more females and underrepresented minorities are joining orthopedic sports medicine, the rate of diversification remains slow and current involvement in leadership and research is minimal. Targeted efforts aimed at increasing research opportunities and inspiring interest through mentorship for URMs and females in orthopedics is essential to drive change toward parity. Level IV. Systematic Review. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

COVID-19’s meso-scale impacts: exploring the perspectives of geoscience department chairs in California

Across the landscape of higher education, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused fundamental changes at a variety of scales. To understand which aspects of higher education instruction at the departmental (meso-scale) level were most and least impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, chairs of geoscience departments at public higher education institutions in California (n = 38) were surveyed on the pandemic’s impacts on teaching in their departments, and whether those changes persisted beyond Spring 2022. The shift to online teaching was the pandemic’s primary impact. The findings indicate that this shift was followed by significant direct and indirect impacts on a variety of departmental and instructional aspects, including assessment methods, course offerings, course structure and organization, enrollment, recruitment and outreach, and student learning, in both positive and negative ways. Conversely, the pandemic had relatively little impact on degree structure and course content. Key pedagogical changes include the increased use of Learning Management Systems (LMSs), non-exam assessment methods, and online and hybrid modalities. The results highlight the need for departmental and institutional support to mitigate negative effects on geoscience in-lab and in-field classes, equity and achievement gaps, graduate student needs, recruitment and outreach efforts, and department chair stress, mental health, and burnout. Continued health and resilience in geoscience departments requires that the pandemic’s negative impacts be identified, studied, and addressed by departments, institutions, and professional organizations. Analyzing effects at the meso-scale is an important part of a multi-faceted, multi-scalar assessment of the pandemic’s impacts on geoscience education.

Characterizing Wellness Leadership in Academic Radiation Oncology Departments in the United States

Burnout is prevalent in radiation oncology (RO), with 56% of respondents in a 2020 survey reporting symptoms of burnout. This has led to an increased effort to promote physician wellness via formal wellness-directed initiatives in recent years. However, little is known about the specifics of wellness activities and their impact. We aim to characterize current wellness leadership positions and efforts within academic RO departments. A total of 120 US academic RO department chairs were contacted to inquire whether they had a departmental wellness leader, with a request for leader contact information, if applicable. Wellness leaders were invited to complete an anonymous survey in January and February 2023 via a survey platform. Questions assessed leader demographics, role structure, resources, current initiatives, and impacts to date. Descriptive statistics and summaries of free text responses are reported. Seventy-one chairs (59%) responded, among which 43 (61%) reported having departmental wellness leaders. On interim analysis, 11 (26%) responded to the survey. 82% were female and 73% were physician faculty. Leaders spanned career stages, and respondent ages ranged from 32-66. Wellness leaders were commonly in formal departmental committees (n = 4) or implemented hospital initiatives without independent departmental programming (n = 5). Committees had all been started since 2020. 5 respondents stated departmental wellness leadership was required by their institution. Some leaders were provided with administrative support (n = 4) and/or departmental program funding (n = 4), however only 1 had protected time for wellness work. Challenges included limited bandwidth (n = 7), lack of departmental interest (n = 4), and limited funding (n = 4). The most commonly completed initiatives include programming and education (n = 4) and improved support for caregivers (n = 3). No departments had hired physician coaches or created a peer support network. Of 14 initiatives, departments had, on average, implemented 2. 36% and 27% of respondents agree that because of wellness initiatives the department is more aware of the importance of wellness and wellness-promoting strategies, respectively. Only 9% and 18% felt initiatives changed a culture of constant availability and encouraged use of full PTO and limiting work off hours, respectively. Leaders highlight the importance of a dedicated individual to tangibly implement changes and the unique opportunity of someone within RO to understand the specific challenges faced by those in our field. Wellness leadership roles exist in many RO departments. However, these roles are new and evolving, with a limited number of fully implemented initiatives to date. Longitudinal data collection and follow-up will help establish the impact of these roles on bringing positive change to departments. Full results will be presented at ASTRO 23.

Academic U.S. Radiation Oncology Department Chairs: Who are They?

Historically, there has been a gender imbalance in the composition of the academic radiation oncology (RO) workforce. Given the increasing diversity of patients treated by academic radiation oncologists across the US, sufficient representation of women in academic RO, especially in leadership, is of paramount importance. In this study, we sought to better understand the characteristics of individuals currently serving as academic RO chairpersons whose departments are affiliated with ACGME-accredited RO residency training programs. We created a comprehensive database of academic RO chairpersons in the US by utilizing information from publicly available sources, including residency training program websites, hospital/institutional websites, Doximity, LinkedIn, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) website, the American College of Radiation Oncology (ACRO) website, and the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System National Provider Identifier Registry. We used the Mann-Whitney U test and two-proportion z tests to evaluate for statistical significance among medians and proportions, respectively. We identified 85/90 chairpersons (94.4%) whose departments are affiliated with an ACGME-accredited RO residency program. 4/85 (4.7%) chairpersons hold interim positions and were excluded from further analyses. Of the remaining 81 chairpersons in permanent positions, 10 (12.3%) are females and 71 (87.7%) are males (p < 0.01). 77 (95.1%) chairpersons are full professors and 19 (23.5%) hold dual MD-PhD degrees. 33 (40.7%) chairpersons hold an official leadership role, such as "director" or "chair," in the cancer institution affiliated with their institution; while such titles are more common among male than female chairpersons, the difference is not statistically significant (43.7% vs 20%, p = 0.15). 74/81 chairpersons secured their current positions a median of 16 years (range 6-33 years) after completing RO residency, with no statistically significant difference between male and female chairpersons (median 16 vs 18 years, respectively; p = 0.38). 36 (44.4%) chairpersons were promoted to chair from another position at their respective institutions (men 70.0% vs females 40.8%, p = 0.08). The majority of chairpersons are ASTRO Fellows (61.7%); notably fewer are ASTRO (3.7%) or ACRO (2.5%) Gold Medalists. There are no statistical differences among male and female chairpersons in the proportion who have received an ASTRO Fellow designation (60.6% vs 70.0%, p = 0.57) or ASTRO (4.2% vs 0.0%, p = 0.51) or ACRO (2.8% vs 0.0%, p = 0.59) Gold Medal. In our benchmark study of the characteristics of current academic US RO chairpersons, we found that significantly more men than women currently serve as RO chairpersons. Future interventions that promote the recruitment, retention, and promotion of talented female academic RO physicians through the academic pipeline are warranted.

The three most important words in faculty workload: transparency, transparency, transparency

Among the most contentious topics between faculty and administration in higher education is defining what constitutes fair and equitable faculty workload. The provost, as chief academic officer, oversees the faculty workload policy, yet implementation is typically carried out at the department level. Specific teaching assignments for each faculty member are determined by the department chair, who must address the needs of the faculty and the department, with oversight from the dean. Like the real estate adage about location, location, location, we suggest that transparency is a critical factor for chairs in assigning faculty workload. Individual faculty sometimes feel that they are doing more work than their colleagues, and a lack of transparency regarding teaching assignments can cause suspicions of favoritism and inequity. Transparency leads to increased trust and a sense of accountability between faculty and academic leaders (O’Meara et al. 2019). Here we discuss three strategies for increasing transparency and, thus, faculty satisfaction in workload matters.

A survey on utilization and barriers of digital removable prostheses in the US dental education.

Gaining knowledge on the extent of digital technology implementation in dental education and the barriers to it will help inform future directions to promote the use of such technology and will enhance dental education. This study aimed to investigate the utilization of digitally fabricated removable prostheses and the potential obstacles to implementing such technology in US dental schools. A survey was developed and distributed to the restorative dentistry department chairs and postdoctoral prosthodontic program directors. The survey delivery protocol included follow-up emails 1 week, 3 weeks, and 4 weeks after the initial email. The collected data were analyzed descriptively. The response rate was 85% and 45% for predoctoral and postdoctoral prosthodontic programs, respectively. The results showed that 88.06% of the predoctoral programs and 95.65% of the postdoctoral prosthodontic programs implement digital complete dentures in the curriculum; however, the digital removable partial dentures implementation rate was recorded at 70.77% in predoctoral programs and 61.9% in postdoctoral prosthodontic programs. Dental schools are challenged by cost, design software limitations, IT and laboratory support, and faculty training. Multifaceted support is instrumental in further implementing digital removable prosthodontics into dental education.

Pro-Con Debate: Consideration of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Is Detrimental to Successful Mentorship.

Anesthesiology remains a specialty with low representation of women or members of racial and ethnic groups considered underrepresented in medicine (UiM). In the United States, women account for 33% of anesthesiology residents, while physicians identifying as Black, African American, Latinx, American Indian, or Alaska Native account for approximately 10%. Underrepresentation of these groups is even more pronounced in academic anesthesiology, especially at the senior ranks and roles, such as department chairs. Leaders in the field have recently shared recommendations for how individual departments, medical schools, hospitals, and professional organizations can create and support a more diverse anesthesiology workforce. These commentaries have often stressed the importance of mentorship for supporting women and physicians from UiM groups, including mentorship of trainees and practicing anesthesiologists seeking to advance their careers. While the value of mentorship is undisputed, it remains a matter of controversy whether race, ethnicity, or gender should be explicitly considered by mentoring programs and individual mentors. In this article, we discuss whether and how race, ethnicity, and gender should be considered in the setting of mentorship programs and the formation of individual mentoring relationships, as well as some of the potential consequences that lie therein.

Academic productivity and NIH funding for anesthesiology departmental chairs: A 15-year comparison

Study objectiveThis study evaluated whether there were improvements in the number of departmental National Institutes of Health (NIH) training grants and the academic productivity of departmental chairs in terms of NIH research funding and PubMed-cited publications when compared to chairs of the same departments in 2006. DesignEach chair was identified from the Society of Academic Associations of Academic Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine's Association of Academic Anesthesiology Chairs and entered into the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORTER), PubMed, SCOPUS, and the National Provider Identifier Registry. MeasurementsThe number and funding amounts of training grants awarded to the department in 2010, 2015, and 2020 were obtained as well as the department's national ranking and total dollar amount for NIH funding in 2020. For the current chair cohort, total publications and m-quotient (h-index corrected for active research years) were recorded along with each chair's history of NIH grant funding. These data were compared to a previous study of anesthesiology chairs that reviewed funding and publications through 2006. Main resultsWe analyzed data from 100 academic departments of anesthesiology and compared their scholarly activity relative to data gathered in 2006. In 2020, 52 of 100 departments of anesthesiology had evidence of NIH funding. There were not statistically significant (P > 0.05) differences in grants funding obtained by chairs between 2006 and 2020 with the exception that more chairs in 2006 had program or center grants. Median publications for chairs significantly increased from 35 in 2006 to 55 in 2021 (IRR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.2–2.0, P = 0.003). Nineteen percent of chairs were female, which did not significantly differ from the proportion of women in the 2006 paper (15%, χ2 = 0.57, df = 1, P = 0.452). Of the male chairs, 90% were professors whereas 63% of female chairs were professors (χ2 = 8.8, df = 1, P = 0.003). Female chairs had fewer publications than male chairs (IRR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.2–1.8, P = 0.002); however, m-quotients were not significantly different between men and women (P = 0.602). ConclusionsWhen compared to 2006, department of anesthesiology chairs had more publications in 2021; however, NIH funding rates remained unchanged. The specialty had 19% female chairs, and those chairs had fewer publications than their male counterparts, though sex differences were attenuated using metrics that account for disparities in career length.

Midlevel Administrators' Work with Department Chairs, Part 3: Engaging in Cross‐Institutional Initiatives

Midlevel Administrators' Work with Department Chairs, Part 3: Engaging in Cross‐Institutional Initiatives

Who is Sitting in the Chair? Job Satisfaction of Women and Men Department Leaders

This study explores an understudied yet critically important role in higher education: the academic department chair. Building on research related to the gendered organization of faculty life and using a national sample of department leaders per the COACHE Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey (n = 1,173), we use descriptive discriminant analysis to identify the set of factors that differentiate between the job satisfaction of women and men who hold department leadership positions at four-year colleges and universities. Findings indicate a clear difference between women and men department leaders in how satisfied they are with their jobs, particularly when it comes to time spent on research, salary, and beliefs about the importance of mentoring. Recommendations and implications for academic leadership are discussed.

The university coursework timetabling problem: An optimization approach to synchronizing course calendars

In university settings, scheduling coursework over an academic term and across several courses is an extremely difficult task, owing to numerous complexities and constraints, such as the uniqueness of each student and instructor’s schedules, workload limits, syllabus considerations, university policies, and the length of the academic term. In addition to the inherent difficulty, the activity is usually performed arbitrarily and with little to no coordination among the relevant decision-makers, including department chairs and faculty members. Although mathematical models have been developed to address similar educational timetabling problems, models that tackle the scheduling of coursework, in particular, are lacking. In this regard, the present study introduces the university coursework timetabling problem (UCWTP), and proposes an optimization tool as a solution approach. The UCWTP involves scheduling a set of coursework covering different courses and several course sections over an academic term such that the quality of the resulting timetable is optimized. To model the case, a multi-objective mixed integer linear programming model was formulated with constraints divided into two types, hard and soft, with the latter defining the quality of the timetable based on three dimensions: (1) compliance with curriculum requirements, (2) adherence to student workload limits, and (3) adherence to instructor workload limits. The hypothetical case considered yielded promising results as a 100% weighted satisfaction was attained, equivalent to an average improvement of 9.45% relative to multiple heuristically constructed timetables. The exact algorithm proves to be sufficiently effective as a solution approach, yielding reasonable computational times of less than 2 min for real-world university scenarios.

Know your rights before you discuss your religious beliefs at work

BOSTON — Although some higher education administrators and faculty members have the desire to express their religious/spiritual beliefs in the workplace, they tend to hesitate to do so because they fear being pigeonholed or thwarted or becoming a source of controversy, and they often misunderstand their legal rights in this area. That's according to Christy Moran Craft, Ph.D., Professor, and Department Chair at Kansas State University, who gave a presentation at the annual conference for National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) — Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education.

Know your rights before you discuss your religious beliefs at work

BOSTON — Although some higher education administrators and faculty members have the desire to express their religious/spiritual beliefs in the workplace, they tend to hesitate to do so because they fear being pigeonholed or thwarted or becoming a source of controversy, and they often misunderstand their legal rights in this area. That's according to Christy Moran Craft, Ph.D., Professor, and Department Chair at Kansas State University, who gave a presentation at the annual conference for National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) — Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education.

Department Chair Perceptions of the New Investigator Award (NIA)

Department Chair Perceptions of the New Investigator Award (NIA)

How to Take Good Care of Your Radiology Department Chair and Why.

How to Take Good Care of Your Radiology Department Chair and Why.

Feminism-in-Action: Dr. Diana Scully.

This essay is a tribute to the former founding Department Chair of Women's Studies at Virginia Commonwealth University, Dr. Diana Scully, by Liz Canfield, a current Associate Chair of the same department.

Know your rights before you discuss your religious beliefs at work

BOSTON — Although some higher education administrators and faculty members have the desire to express their religious/spiritual beliefs in the workplace, they tend to hesitate to do so because they fear being pigeonholed, thwarted, or becoming a source of controversy, and they often misunderstand their legal rights in this area. That's according to Christy Moran Craft, Ph.D., Professor and Department Chair at Kansas State University, who gave a presentation at the annual conference for NASPA — Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education.