Fellowship Track Research Articles

Factors associated with infectious diseases fellowship academic success

ABSTRACT Background A multitude of factors are considered in an infectious disease (ID) training program’s meticulous selection process of ID fellows but their correlation to pre and in-fellowship academic success as well as post-fellowship academic success and short-term outcomes is poorly understood. Our goal was to investigate factors associated with subsequent academic success in fellowship as well as post-fellowship short-term outcomes. Methods In 2022, we retrospectively analyzed deidentified academic records from 39 graduates of the Mayo Clinic Rochester ID Fellowship Program (1 July 2013- 30 June 2022). Data abstracted included demographics, degrees, honor society membership, visa/citizenship status, medical school, residency training program, United States Medical Licensure Exam (USMLE) scores, letters of recommendation, in-training examination (ITE) scores, fellowship track, academic rank, career choice, number of honors, awards, and abstracts/publications prior to fellowship, during training, and within 2 years of graduation. Results Younger fellows had higher USMLE step 1 scores, pre and in-fellowship scholarly productivity, and higher ITE performance. Female fellows had significantly higher USMLE step 3 scores. Prior research experience translated to greater in-fellowship scholarly productivity. Higher USMLE scores were associated with higher ID ITE performance during multiple years of fellowship, but USMLE step 2 clinical knowledge and 3 scores were associated with higher pre and in-fellowship scholarly productivity and receiving an award during fellowship. The USMLE step 1 score did not correlate with fellowship performance beyond year 1 and 2 ITE scores. Conclusions Multiple aspects of a prospective fellow’s application must be considered as part of a holistic review process for fellowship selection. USMLE step 2 CK and 3 scores may predict fellowship performance across multiple domains.

DEVELOPING A GERIATRIC ONCOLOGY FELLOWSHIP SUBSPECIALTY TRACK FOR ADVANCED PRACTICE PROVIDERS

Abstract Although a relatively young subspeciality, geriatric oncology is a fast-growing discipline. As the population ages, clinicians skilled in geriatric oncology principles and management are needed to care for an increasingly complex older adult population. Educating Advanced Practice Providers (APP) in geriatric oncology may offer innovative ways of increasing access to care, supporting patient health, and improving quality of life. The need for trained clinicians represented a unique opportunity for the development of a geriatric oncology focused APP fellowship subspecialty track at our institution. In 2019, with support from the Samuels Foundation, an electronic geriatric oncology needs assessment was completed among the APPs at our institution. Data from this needs assessment and from a thorough literature review were used to develop the geriatric oncology fellowship track curriculum. With support from APP leadership at our institution, the fellowship track launched in September, 2021. It is a 12-month postgraduate academic program that focuses on geriatric assessment, risk stratification prior to cancer directed therapies, management of geriatric syndromes, and geriatric co-management. Additionally in 2023, the fellowship track will include an elective in a long-term care facility. We believe this unique elective rotation will be a strong addition to the clinical experience of the fellow. Our current program has one position per fellowship year with the goal of increasing the number of positions in the future. This is a major step forward in the education of APPs in the care of older adults with cancer that we hope will be replicated across the country.

Meeting the demand for fertility services: the present and future of reproductive endocrinology and infertility in the United States

The field of reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) is at a crossroads; there is a mismatch between demand for reproductive endocrinology, infertility and assisted reproductive technology (ART) services, and availability of care. This document's focus is to provide data justifying the critical need for increased provision of fertility services in the United States now and into the future, offer approaches to rectify the developing physician shortage problem, and suggest a framework for the discussion on how to meet that increase in demand. The Society of REI recommend the following: 1. Our field should aggressively explore and implement courses of action to increase the number of qualified, highly trained REI physicians trained annually. We recommend efforts to increase the number of REI fellowships and the size complement of existing fellowships be prioritized where possible. These courses of action include: a. Increase the number of REI fellowship training programs. b. Increase the number of fellows trained at current REI fellowship programs. c. The pros and cons of a 2-year focused clinical fellowship track for fellows interested primarily in ART practice were extensively explored. We do not recommend shortening the REI fellowship to 2 years at this time, because efforts should be focused on increasing the number of fellowship training slots (1a and b). 2. It is recommended that the field aggressively implements courses of action to increase the number of and appropriate usage of non-REI providers to increase clinical efficiency under appropriate board-certified REI physician supervision. 3. Automating processes through technologic improvements can free providers at all levels to practice at the top of their license.

Pro: Integrated Five-Year Anesthesiology Residency Should Be Implemented Widely

Pro: Integrated Five-Year Anesthesiology Residency Should Be Implemented Widely

A half‐century check‐up for child neurology training

A half‐century check‐up for child neurology training

Anesthesiology Articles Published in 2020: A Review and Characterization of COVID-19 Versus Non-COVID-19 Publications in Top Anesthesiology Journals.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on the practice of medicine worldwide, particularly in anesthesiology. As the clinical realm has rapidly adjusted to the realities of the pandemic, anesthesiology literature has also changed significantly to reflect this. The purpose of this study was to characterize the effects the COVID-19 pandemic has had on anesthesiology literature. Specifically, it was hypothesized that the COVID-19-related literature in the anesthesiology community would gain more interest than non-COVID-19-related articles. A total of 15 anesthesiology-related journals with the highest impact factor in 2019, according to the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), were selected for data collection. An advanced PubMed search identified 5,722 COVID-19-related articles published by these journals in 2020. Next, articles with titles including “corona,” “COVID,” “COVID-19,” “pandemic,” “SARS,” or “SARS-CoV-2” were selected for inclusion in the study, which resulted in 676 (12%) articles. A Kruskal-Wallis test was used to assess the Altmetric score, which is a weighted calculation of the attention an article receives online, for COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 articles. Articles were then further characterized across multiple different variables, including country of origin, month published, type of article, and subspecialty of anesthesiology it pertained to. Of the 15 journals investigated, 676 (12%) articles of the 5,722 total articles published were found to be COVID-19-related material. The majority of the articles were found to be published in April (18%), May (19.5%), and June (14%). The majority of these articles were related either to general anesthesia (operating room anesthesiology that is not tied to a particular subspecialty fellowship track) (48%) or critical care (39%). By article type, most were determined to be editorial (71%) in nature, followed by original research articles (21%), of which most were cross-sectional (55%) studies. When compared with non-COVID-19-related articles, COVID-19-related articles had a significantly greater Altmetric score (29.518 versus 8.6333, p < 0.001). Of the COVID-19-related articles, original articles had the greatest Altmetric score, when compared to editorials and guidelines (54.794 versus 20.777 versus 40.643, p < 0.002). The response of the academic anesthesiology community to the COVID-19 pandemic was strong and timely, with a particularly strong focus on critical care anesthesia. The impact of the pandemic was strongly felt by the anesthesiology community, and their timely response served to guide our country and world through an incredibly challenging time. The pandemic highlighted the value of anesthesiologists worldwide, not only in the operating room setting but particularly as critical care physicians.

Integrative Hematology Oncology Fellowship Program: A National Survey Based Analysis of Need

Introduction:Integrative hematology oncology (IHO), the combination of complementary medicine in conjunction with conventional cancer treatments, is emerging as an important supportive care modality. Formal education programs, such as IHO fellowship programs, are not currently available. We conducted a national survey to gauge interest and investigate barriers to the development of IHO training programs in the US.Methods:An 18-question survey was sent to hematology/oncology, radiation oncology, and palliative care program directors, physicians, and fellows, and internal medicine residents planning to enter into any of the above fellowship programs. Recruitment was national with use of public email list servs and social media. Program directors and fellowship programs were identified through the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). Participant informed consent was completed online and, Qualtrics survey links were shared weekly via email in two 4-week sessions.Results:Participants (n=208) included physicians from: Hematology/Oncology 65.9% (n=137), Radiation Oncology 8.6%(n=18) and Palliative Care 25.4% (n=53). Hematology oncology respondents included physicians 47.4% (n=65), fellows 33.6% (n=46), and residents planning to enter into a hematology oncology fellowship 3.6% (n=5). Program directors (n=69) from each specialty included: 15.3% (n=21) from hematology/oncology, 61.1% (n=11) from radiation oncology, and 69.8% (n=37) from palliative care. Interestingly, palliative care had the highest response rate in this category. Survey respondents were mostly aged 31-40 y (38.4%), 41-50 y (23.8%), or 51-60 y (21.5%). Participant genders were male (45.7%), female (50.9%), or prefer not to identify (3.5%). There was diverse regional participation across the United States. Overall participant responses revealed significant interest for an IHO training program, despite little (36.0%) to no (49.4%) previous training in integrative medicine (Table 1).Curriculum topics of primary interest were physician/provider wellness, stress reduction techniques, off-label use of medication, exercise/physical activity, nutrition, and lifestyle counseling. The preferred education delivery was didactic lectures and clinical practice exposure. Barriers to implementation included lack of good curriculum and inadequate budget/time/faculty experience to implement the program. Need for IHO training was based on perceived benefit to patients in 39 participants (73.6%), and patient request for services in 37 participants (68.8%).Conclusion:In this national survey of 208 physicians, the majority (64%) expressed interest in IHO education programs. Barriers included lack of curriculum, expertise, budget, and time. Education preference for fellowship track and certificate programs were similar, suggesting interest of both available options. Most participants (87%) felt fellows should participate in IHO research. In conclusion, IHO training is perceived as valuable and desirable. Thus, the development and dissemination of IHO training programs is needed. [Display omitted] DisclosuresGowin: Incyte: Speakers Bureau.

The Institute on Methods and Protocols for Advancement of Clinical Trials in ADRD (IMPACT-AD): A Novel Clinical Trials Training Program

BackgroundAlzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) clinical trials require multidisciplinary expertise in medicine, biostatistics, trial design, biomarkers, ethics, and informatics.ObjectivesTo provide focused interactive training in ADRD clinical trials to a diverse cadre of investigators.DesignThe Institute on Methods and Protocols for Advancement of Clinical Trials in ADRD (IMPACT-AD) is a novel multidisciplinary clinical trial training program funded by the National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association with two educational tracks. The Professionals track includes individuals who fill a broad variety of roles including clinicians, study coordinators, psychometricians, and other study professionals who wish to further their knowledge and advance their careers in ADRD trials. The Fellowship track includes current and future principal investigators and focuses on the design, conduct and analysis of ADRD clinical trials.SettingThe 2020 inaugural iteration of IMPACT-AD was held via Zoom.ParticipantsThirty-five trainees (15 Fellowship track; 20 Professionals track) were selected from 104 applications (34% acceptance rate). Most (n=25, 71%) identified as female. Fifteen (43%) were of a non-white race; six (18%) were of Hispanic ethnicity; eight (23%) indicated they were the first person in their family to attend college.MeasurementsParticipants completed daily evaluations as well as pre- and post-course assessments of learning.ResultsAcross topic areas, >90% of trainees evaluated their change in knowledge based on the lectures as “very much” or “somewhat increased.” The mean proportion correct responses in pre- and post-course assessments increased from 55% to 75% for the Professionals track and from 54% to 78% for the Fellowship track.ConclusionsIMPACT-AD successfully launched a new training opportunity amid a global pandemic that preliminarily achieved the goals of attracting a diverse cohort and providing meaningful training. The course is funded through 2025.

Administration and performance on the Spinal Cord Injury Medicine Certification Examination over a 10-year period

Context/Objective: The examination for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Medicine subspecialty certification has been administered since 1998, but published information about exam performance or administration is limited.Design: Retrospective reviewSetting/Participants: We examined de-identified information from the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) database for characteristics and performance of candidates (n = 566) who completed the SCI Medicine Examination over a 10-year period (2005–2014), during which the exam outline and passing standard remained consistent.Interventions: Not applicableOutcome Measures: We analysed candidate performance by candidate track, primary specialty, number of attempts, and domains being tested. We also examined candidate perception of the SCI Medicine Exam by analysing responses to a survey taken after exam completion.Results: Thirty-six percent of candidates who completed the exam during the study period took it for initial certification (23% in the fellowship track and 13% in the practice track offered during the initial “grandfathering” period) and 64% took it for maintenance of certification (MOC) in SCI Medicine. Factors associated with better exam performance included primary specialty certification in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) and first attempt at passing the exam. For PM&R candidates, ABPMR Part I Examination scores and SCI Medicine Examination scores were strongly correlated. Candidate feedback about the exam was largely positive with 97% agreeing or strongly agreeing that it was relevant to the field and 90% that it was a good test of their knowledge.Conclusion: This study can inform prospective candidates for the SCI Medicine Examination as well as those guiding them. It may also provide useful information for future exam development.

Creating a Global Acute Care Surgery Fellowship to Meet International Need

Existing Acute Care Surgery (ACS) fellowships are positioned to develop well-trained surgeons with specific skills to facilitate improvements in care delivery in Global ACS. Many resident and fellowship programs offer clinical electives that expose trainees to operative experiences, exposing trainees to the needs in resource-challenged settings. However, most lack a focus on long-term development and research designed to enhance the country's local skills, capability, and capacity. The Global Acute Care Surgery (Global ACS) fellowship produces a surgeon who focuses on capacity building and systems development across the world. At Vanderbilt University, the current American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-Acute Care Surgery (AAST-ACS) fellowship was adapted to create an academic Global Acute Care Surgery (Global ACS) fellowship. This fellowship specifically enhances fellowship trainee's skills in needs assessment and performing research to facilitate the development and implementation of trauma and acute care surgery systems in low- and middle income countries. This research will foster context-appropriate data, collected and based in low- and middle-income countries, to guide practice and policy. Two fellows have completed the Global ACS fellowship at Vanderbilt University. The fellowship requirements, clinical skills, project development and overall goals are outlined within the article. Challenges, funding, and mentorship must also be addressed to develop a comprehensive fellowship. A sample two-year timeline is provided to complete the fellowship track and meet the defined goals. A structured global acute care surgery fellowship enables fellows to reduce the surgical burden of disease and contribute to surgical systems development at both local and international levels by creating meaningful research and developing sustainable change in LMIC countries.

The first assessment of operative logs for traditional vascular fellowship track versus integrated vascular training programs

As vascular surgery training paradigms evolve, one measure of success is operative experience. This study assessed the initial operative experience of those graduating from new integrated programs (0+5) vs those from the traditional programs (5+2). National operative case log data supplied by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education was compiled for vascular surgical residents graduating between 2010 and 2013. Mean case numbers for the 0+5 residents were compared with those for the 5+2 residents (experience from their general surgery residency plus vascular fellowship) for total vascular operations, open vascular operations, endovascular procedures, and total operative experience. The 5+2 trainees performed significantly more procedures than the 0+5 trainees (mean, 1605 vs 1015); however, they performed 12% less vascular procedures (mean, 758 vs 851). No significant differences in total number of open vascular operations (mean, 404 vs 411) or specific open operations for cerebral vascular disease, aneurysm, peripheral obstruction, and access were found. The increase in vascular procedures logged by 0+5 trainees was realized by a 24% increase in endovascular procedures, mainly involving diagnostic arteriography, caval filter placement, and balloon angioplasty. No significant differences were seen in endovascular aneurysm repair (mean, 63 vs 60) and stent placement (mean, 59 vs 60). This report summarizes the first data available for the 0+5 trainee operative experience. Compared with the traditional 5+2 trainees, the 0+5 trainees have (1) equivalent open vascular training and (2) overall superior endovascular training, although this was accounted via an increase in minor procedures. The overall operative experience remains greater for the 5+2 trainees secondary to 2 extra years of training. Further longitudinal studies will be needed to fully characterize the effect of the new 0+5 training paradigm.

Training the teachers. The clinician-educator track of the University of Washington Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Program.

The University of Washington was the first pulmonary and critical care medicine fellowship training program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education to create a dedicated clinician-educator fellowship track that has its own National Residency Matching Program number. This track was created in response to increasing demand for focused training in medical education in pulmonary and critical care. Through the Veterans Health Administration we obtained a stipend for a clinician-educator fellow to dedicate 12 months to training in medical education. This takes place predominantly in the second year of fellowship and is composed of several core activities: fellows complete the University of Washington's Teaching Scholars Program, a professional development program designed to train leaders in medical education; they teach in a variety of settings and receive feedback on their work from clinician-educator faculty and the learners; and they engage in scholarly activity, which may take the form of scholarship of teaching, integration, or investigation. Fellows are guided throughout this process by a primary mentor and a mentoring committee. Since funding became available in 2009, two of the three graduates to date have successfully secured clinician-educator faculty positions. Graduates uniformly believe that the clinician-educator track met their training goals better than the research-based track would have.

Early Returns: Operative Logs for Traditional Vascular Fellowship Track Versus Integrated Vascular Training Programs

Early Returns: Operative Logs for Traditional Vascular Fellowship Track Versus Integrated Vascular Training Programs

Different tracks for pathology informatics fellowship training: Experiences of and input from trainees in a large multisite fellowship program

Background: Pathology Informatics is a new field; a field that is still defining itself even as it begins the formalization, accreditation, and board certification process. At the same time, Pathology itself is changing in a variety of ways that impact informatics, including subspecialization and an increased use of data analysis. In this paper, we examine how these changes impact both the structure of Pathology Informatics fellowship programs and the fellows’ goals within those programs. Materials and Methods: As part of our regular program review process, the fellows evaluated the value and effectiveness of our existing fellowship tracks (Research Informatics, Clinical Two-year Focused Informatics, Clinical One-year Focused Informatics, and Clinical 1 + 1 Subspecialty Pathology and Informatics). They compared their education, informatics background, and anticipated career paths and analyzed them for correlations between those parameters and the fellowship track chosen. All current and past fellows of the program were actively involved with the project. Results: Fellows’ anticipated career paths correlated very well with the specific tracks in the program. A small set of fellows (Clinical – one or two year – Focused Informatics tracks) anticipated clinical careers primarily focused in informatics (Director of Informatics). The majority of the fellows, however, anticipated a career practicing in a Pathology subspecialty, using their informatics training to enhance that practice (Clinical 1 + 1 Subspecialty Pathology and Informatics Track). Significantly, all fellows on this track reported they would not have considered a Clinical Two-year Focused Informatics track if it was the only track offered. The Research and the Clinical One-year Focused Informatics tracks each displayed unique value for different situations. Conclusions: It seems a “one size fits all” fellowship structure does not fit the needs of the majority of potential Pathology Informatics candidates. Increasingly, these fellowships must be able to accommodate the needs of candidates anticipating a wide range of Pathology Informatics career paths, be able to accommodate Pathology's increasingly subspecialized structure, and do this in a way that respects the multiple fellowships needed to become a subspecialty pathologist and informatician. This is further complicated as Pathology Informatics begins to look outward and takes its place in the growing, and still ill-defined, field of Clinical Informatics, a field that is not confined to just one medical specialty, to one way of practicing medicine, or to one way of providing patient care.

Peer Review of Manuscripts Submitted Via the Academy Fellowship Track

When the American Society for Microbiology set out to create a topflight entry into the new world of online, open-access journals, it had a number of assets in its favor. Endorsement by the American Academy of Microbiology (AAM), ASM’s honorific branch, was one of the critical assets. The AAM is home to more than 2,000 Academy Fellows, each of whom has been identified by a highly selective election process as an outstanding, internationally respected scientist. When mBio was launched, AAM Fellows were given the opportunity to submit their research findings on a privileged track (see http://mbio.asm.org/site/misc/fellows.xhtml for complete details), similar to that provided to members of the National Academy of …