First Author Publications Research Articles

Academic Neurosurgery Gender and Authorship Trends in the United States.

Women represent ∼20% of the national neurosurgical resident cohort but only ∼10% of academic neurosurgeons in the United States. Recognizing that the publication of scientific literature contributes to academic advancement, we measured authorship trends of academic neurosurgeons to query publication differences as an explanation for the discrepancy of female representation in academic positions. Physician data were obtained from program and individual physician webpages. Annual total, first author, and senior author publications were recorded for each neurosurgeon from 1980 to 2020. Mean publication number as a function of the year relative to residency graduation was calculated for all, first author, and senior author publications for all timepoints with >50 individuals. The mean first years of publication were compared using unpaired 2-tailed t-tests. The slope of publication for the senior author and all publications was calculated using individual best-fit lines from years 0 to 10 relative to residency graduation. Overall, 1601 faculty members were evaluated (female = 167 [10.4%], male = 1434 [89.6%]). First-author publication for female members peaked at 0.60 publications/year, and for male members at 0.80 publications/year, both at -1 year from graduation (P = .038). Female first publication occurred earlier (-2.4 vs 1.45 years; P < .00001). The mean increase in all publications/year from years 0 to 10 was 0.25 for women and 0.28 for men (P = .68). The increase in senior publications/year was 0.11 for women and 0.13 for men (P = .39). The ratio of total publications to the Scopus h-index was 3.08 for women and 3.62 for men (P = .07). These data suggest that women publish earlier but have fewer first-author publications at -1 year, the timepoint of peak publication for both genders. There was no significant gender difference in rates of the first author and all publications over the years 0 to 10. The ratio of publications to the h-index did not differ significantly but showed a trend suggesting that women produce higher-impact articles and may need fewer publications to achieve the same change in the h-index.

Publication productivity of pathology residents: a nationwide cohort study in France.

The publication productivity of residents has been reported in various specialties, mainly in North America, but never in pathology. In France, pathology residents must defend a medical thesis to obtain the title of medical doctor and to practice medicine. The aim of this study was to assess the thesis performance and publication output of a nationwide cohort of pathology residents from six graduating classes in France. Among 231 theses, 110 (48%) resulted in publications, of which 95% were original articles (OA) and 74% were resident first-author publications. The median impact factor (IF) was 3.6 (2.8-5.9). During residency and in the 4years following defense, residents published a median of 5 (2-10) total publications, 2 (1-6) OA, and 1 (0-3) first-author manuscripts. Among 1849 publications, 822 (44%) were first, second, or last-authored by residents. The median IF of the 362 (20%) OA published as first, second, and last author was 3.1 (2.4-5), 3.3 (2.2-5.2), and 3.2 (0.9-3.3), respectively. Only 44% of these OA were indexed in the pathology category according to Web of Science, with Virchows Arch being the most common journal. Residents who published their medical thesis had a higher median number of total publications, as well as first- and last-author OA (p = 0.0005, p = 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively). The publication record of pathology residents goes beyond the field of pathology, with most contributions to non-pathology journals. The mandatory medical thesis provides a valuable opportunity for pathology residents to engage in research and may be the first step towards publication productivity.

Predicting a successful match among applicants to reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship

To identify independent predictors of a successful match to reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) fellowships, and to develop and internally validate a prediction model for REI match results. Retrospective cohort study. REI fellowship applications sent to the University of Pennsylvania from 2019 to 2023 (excluding 2020), which represented nearly all REI applicants nationally according to National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data. Demographics, education, training, and academic achievements. Match result, confirmed through online search and communication with program administrators. Univariate analyses identified variables associated with match, which were then included in multivariable models to identify independent predictors. Bootstrapping was used to assess model discrimination and calibration. The final model was integrated into a web-based tool. Of 286 applications (99.0% of REI applications to the NRMP), 199 (69.6%) resulted in a successful match. In univariate analyses, variables associated with match were younger age, attendance at an allopathic U.S. medical school, USMLE and CREOG scores, residency rank, residency affiliation with a fellowship, research experiences, first-author publications, abstracts/articles in progress, and poster presentations. In the adjusted model, independent predictors of match included residency affiliation with an REI fellowship (aOR 5.43, 2.02-14.64), residency rank (aOR 1.77, 1.25-2.50), USMLE score (aOR 1.05, 1.02-1.08), at least one first-author publication (aOR 2.32, 1.08-4.96), projects in progress (aOR 1.26 (1.02-1.55), and poster presentations (aOR 1.07, 1.00-1.15). Attendance at an international medical school was a negative predictor (aOR 0.32, 0.11-0.88). The model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.883, with 88.5% sensitivity and 65.8% specificity. A refined model without USMLE scores maintained strong performance (C-statistic 0.85, 0.81-0.91; calibration slope 0.91, 0.72-1.24). Affiliation with an REI fellowship, residency reputation, and research output strongly predicted match success. Gender, race, and ethnicity were not major predictors, yet underrepresentation of certain racial and ethnic groups limited the power to detect potential differences. Our prediction model correctly classified >75% of candidates' match results. These findings may help candidates optimize applications and estimate chances of a successful match into REI fellowship, as well as assist programs in critically reviewing their selection criteria for fellowship match.

Publication behaviour and (dis)qualification of chief editors in Turkish national Social Sciences journals

Abstract Purpose This study investigated the publication behaviour of 573 chief editors managing 432 Social Sciences journals in Turkey. Direct inquiries into editorial qualifications are rare, and this research aims to shed light on editors’ scientific leadership capabilities. Design/methodology/approach This study contrasts insider publication behaviour in national journals with international articles in journals indexed by the Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus. It argues that editors demonstrating a consistent ability to publish in competitive WOS and Scopus indexed journals signal high qualifications, while editors with persistent insider behaviour and strong local orientation signal low qualification. Scientific leadership capability is measured by first-authored publications. Correlation and various regression tests are conducted to identify significant determinants of publication behaviour. Findings International publications are rare and concentrated on a few individuals, while insider publications are endemic and constitute nearly 40% of all national articles. Editors publish 3.2 insider papers and 8.1 national papers for every SSCI article. 62% (58%) of the editors have no SSCI (Scopus) article, 53% (63%) do not have a single lead-authored WOS (Scopus) article, and 89% publish at least one insider paper. Only a minority consistently publish in international journals; a fifth of the editors have three or more SSCI publications, and a quarter have three or more Scopus articles. Editors with foreign Ph.D. degrees are the most qualified and internationally oriented, whereas non-mobile editors are the most underqualified and underperform other editors by every measure. Illustrating the overall lack of qualification, nearly half of the professor editors and the majority of the WOS and Scopus indexed journal editors have no record of SSCI or Scopus publications. Research limitations This research relies on local settings that encourage national publications at the expense of international journals. Findings should be evaluated in light of this setting and bearing in mind that narrow localities are more prone to peer favouritism. Practical implications Incompetent and nepotistic editors pose an imminent threat to Turkish national literature. A lasting solution would likely include the dismissal and replacement of unqualified editors, as well as delisting and closure of dozens of journals that operate in questionable ways and serve little scientific purpose. Originality/value To my knowledge, this is the first study to document the publication behaviour of national journal chief editors.

Pediatric cancer research trends and performance in Africa: A bibliometric analysis from 1991 to 2022

BackgroundChildhood cancer rates in Africa are lower than in high-income countries but increasing, making pediatric cancers a significant public health concern. The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the publication of pediatric cancer research in Africa, including publication types and citation trends over time. MethodsThe Science Citation Index Expanded database within the Web of Science Core Collection was searched for articles published from 1991 to 2022 in the topic domain, using title, abstract, author keywords, and KeyWords Plus. Indicators used to assess publications performance of the countries included: total number of publications, single-country publications, collaborative publications with African countries, collaborative publications with non-African countries, first-author publications, corresponding-author publications, and single-author publications. ResultsA total of 4461 relevant documents were retrieved, with 2770 original research articles. Annual number of articles rose from 13 articles in 1991 to 287 in 2022. Most articles were produced by Egypt (28 %) in North Africa, followed by South Africa (20 %) in sub-Saharan Africa. Collaboration between African countries remains low; however, international collaborations have enhanced the average number of citations per article. Most of the first authors (65 %) and corresponding authors (67 %) of these international collaborative articles were affiliated with non-African institutions. ConclusionsThe number of publications sharply increased over the study period and diversely represents African countries. Collaborations with international partners increased citations; however, few of these publications had African first authors. Conversely, inter-institutional partnerships between African countries were relatively low, highlighting the need for better collaboration within Africa.

Do We Need More Structured MD Thesis Programs? A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of the Research Program at the Medical Faculty Dresden

IntroductionConducting a Medical Doctorate (MD) thesis is desired by the majority of medical students. However, the needed scientific competencies are not regularly implemented in medical education. To support students during their MD thesis, a graduate college was implemented. The present study aims to investigate the impact of this structured MD thesis program on the outcome of the MD thesis and the further scientific career.MethodsAn online survey covering 59 items was distributed to all current and former medical students who officially started their MD thesis from 2011 to 2022. The survey investigated the impact of the structured MD thesis program on the scientific development of participating students compared to students outside the structured program.ResultsBased on a total of 370 complete answers, the analysis indicated that participants of the structured program have a significantly better outcome of their MD thesis compared to the control cohort based on objective parameters such as the thesis grade, the number of first-author publications, attendance of congresses, and the number of rewards. Additionally, participation in the program led to a more sustainable integration of students into research measured by the participation or pursuit of clinician scientist programs. Propensity score matched analyses of 60 participants confirmed the results.ConclusionParticipation in a structured MD thesis program significantly improved the outcome and may support sustainable integration into research. Therefore, the implementation of such programs should be further expanded to secure the education of scientifically trained MD graduates.

Assessing the impact of Canadian primary care research and researchers: Citation analysis.

To describe the citation impact and characteristics of Canadian primary care researchers and research publications. Citation analysis. Canada. A total of 266 established Canadian primary care researchers. The 50 most cited primary care researchers in Canada were identified by analyzing data from the Scopus database. Various parameters, including the number of publications and citations, research themes, Scopus h index, content analysis, journal impact factors, and field-weighted citation impact for their publications, were assessed. Information about the characteristics of these researchers was collected using the Google search engine. On average, the 50 most cited primary care researchers produced 51.1 first-author publications (range 13 to 249) and were cited 1864.32 times (range 796 to 9081) over 29 years. Twenty-seven publications were cited more than 500 times. More than half of the researchers were men (60%). Most were clinician scientists (86%) with a primary academic appointment in family medicine (86%) and were affiliated with 5 universities (74%). Career duration was moderately associated with the number of first-author publications (0.35; P=.013). Most research focused on family practice, while some addressed health and health care issues (eg, continuing professional education, pharmaceutical policy). Canada is home to a cadre of primary care researchers who are highly cited in the medical literature, suggesting that their work is of high quality and relevance. Building on this foundation, further investments in primary care research could accelerate needed improvements in Canadian primary care policy and practice.

819 Pre-residency Research Output Amongst U.S. Neurological Surgery Residents

INTRODUCTION: Research productivity is often used in evaluating candidates for neurosurgery residency. Official Match data report successful candidates have on average ∼25 pre-residency research products; however, average number of indexed publications, the highest-valued research product, is not reported separate from other research products. METHODS: A list of all US neurosurgery residents who successfully matched between 2017-2021 was generated and narrowed to US MD seniors who applied to the authors’ institution. Each resident’s pre-residency publication quantity was extracted using Scopus. Additional variables were extracted from residency applications. RESULTS: 93.2% of all matched neurosurgery applicants from 2017 through 2021 were captured. Distribution of publication quantity was right skewed. Mean ± SD total, neuroscience-specific, and first-author pre-residency publications for applicants who matched in 2021 were 8.1 ± 10.0, 6.6 ± 8.7, and 2.3 ± 3.8 respectively. Median (IQR) total, neuroscience-specific, and first-author pre-residency publications were 5.0 (2.0, 11.0), 4.0 (1.5, 9.0), and 1.0 (0.0, 3.0) respectively. There was a statistically significant increase in average total, neuroscience-specific, and first-author publications from 2017 to 2021 (p &lt; 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an independent, positive association between class year and publication quantity (1.07 (0.71-1.42), p &lt; 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Indexed publications constitute a small portion of total research products successful neurosurgery candidates apply with. A high number of publications is not necessary to match with approximately 50% of all applicants who successfully matched having fewer than five publications and 25% having fewer than two. That said, average pre-residency publication quantity is increasing over time at a rate of approximately one publication per year.

Analysis of justification for author order and gender bias in author order among those contributing equally.

First-author publications are important for early career scientists to secure funding and educational opportunities. However, an analysis published in eLife in 2019 noted that female authors are more likely to be placed second even when both authors report they have contributed equally. American Society for Microbiology announced in response that they would require submissions to include a written justification of author order. In this paper, we analyze the resultant data and show that laboratories are most likely to use some combination of alphabetical order, seniority, and chance to determine author order. However, the prevalence of these methods varies based on the research team's geographic location. These findings highlight the importance of equal contributor statements to provide clarity for readers, funding agencies, and tenure committees. Furthermore, this work is critically important for understanding how these decisions are made and provides a glimpse of the sociology of science.

Publication Rates of Podium Presentations at an Annual Orthopedic Surgery Resident and Fellow Research Symposium.

Introduction Research is an important aspect of residency and fellowship programs across the country. Developing strategies to foster research productivity is worthwhile. An annual research project is one strategy that some programs implement. Methods All resident and fellow (Sports Medicine, Adult Reconstruction, Spine) presentations at an orthopedic surgery department's annual research symposium from June 2016 through June 2021 were identified. Abstract titles, title keywords, and author names were searched in PubMed and Google Scholar to identify the presence of a peer-reviewed publication. Using the total number of research symposium presentations given, the publication rate was calculated for each year, as well as collectively for 2016 to 2021. In addition to publication rate, first author percent, number of citations, Altmetric score, and journal impact factor were recorded. Current PGY-2 through PGY-5 residents completed a survey to assess the perceived value of the annual research symposium. Results Ninety-eight research symposium presentations were reviewed (69 residents, 29 fellows). Forty (58%) resident studies were published and 28 were first-author publications (70%). Thirteen (45%) fellow studies were published and seven were first-author publications (54%). Combining residents and fellows, the overall publication rate was 54% (53/98), and 66% of these (35/53) were first-author publications. There was a wide range of published manuscript journal impact factors, Altmetric scores, and number of citations. All residents surveyed reported finding value in the research symposium. Conclusion The overall publication rate of presentations at an annual orthopedic surgery department research symposium between 2016 and 2021 was 54%, consistent with publication rates reported at National Orthopedic Surgery Society meetings. All residents reported finding value in the annual research symposium.The results of this study support the academic value of implementing a required annual research project and may provide a useful gauge to inform residency and fellowship curricula at other institutions.

Medical Student Research Activity in Otolaryngology.

To investigate medical student research productivity by institutions associated with otolaryngology residency programs and identify correlates of productivity. Retrospective review. N/A. A systematic search for articles indexed on PubMed published by 116 programs from January 1, 2016 to February 28, 2021 was conducted. Primary outcomes were number of faculty publications, first-author medical student publications and medical students from each institution. Secondary outcomes included geographic region, number of otolaryngology faculty members, and program rankings. Nationally, the mean number of faculty per institution was 21.7 at the time of search. Over a 5-year period, there was a mean 98.7 total publications and 15.8 medical student first-author publications per institution consisting of a mean of 10.03 distinct medical students. One-way analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference in medical student productivity (P = .09) or department size (P = .12) between regions. Number of medical student first-author publications positively correlated to number of faculty (R = .43, P < .05) and number of faculty publications (R = .63, P < .05). The top 30 programs ranked by United States News & World Report or National Institute of Health for funding had a statistically significantly greater mean number of medical student first-author publications and distinct medical student first authors than all other programs (P < .05). Greater numbers of faculty members likely provide more mentorship and opportunities that allow medical students to engage in projects that lead to first-author publications. These findings allow institutions to reflect on efforts in medical student engagement and provide data to students for career planning.

Impact of Early Research Productivity on Future Academic Output Among Head and Neck Fellows.

To examine the impact of pre-fellowship publications on future research productivity and career placement among head and neck (H&N) surgery fellowship graduates. H&N surgery fellowship graduates between 2014 and 2022 were identified from publicly available data. Timing of fellowship graduation, number of publications during each stage of education and training, and number of first authorship publications were analyzed for association with scholarly productivity and academic career placement. In our analysis of 409 H&N fellowship graduates, there was a strong positive correlation between the year of fellowship graduation and the average number of publications in residency (R2 = 0.82) and fellowship (R2 = 0.79). Graduates producing more than the average of 2.37 publications prior to residency had a significantly higher average number of publications during residency and fellowship compared to those who published below average (p < 0.001). A higher number of publications prior to and during residency were both independently associated with a higher likelihood of academic career placement (p = 0.015 and p = 0.002, respectively). More first-author publications prior to residency were associated with a higher number of publications during residency and fellowship (p = 0.015). In sub-analyses, gender did not impact the average number of publications during residency and fellowship. Similarly, the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly impact the average number of publications during the fellowship when comparing the classes of 2020-2022 to 2017-2019. Research productivity among H&N fellowship graduates has increased in recent years. Research productivity in medical school and residency is associated with scholarly output in later stages of training and academic career placement. NA Laryngoscope, 134:3165-3169, 2024.

An Analysis of Medical Student PubMed-Indexed Research Productivity and Factors Associated With Matching at Top-Ranked Ophthalmology Residency Programs.

Background Limited information exists regarding the research productivity of matched ophthalmology applicants given that ophthalmology residencies do not participate in the National Residency Match Program. Objectives This study determines the research productivity characteristics of matched ophthalmology applicants and variables associated with matching to higher-tier ophthalmology residency programs. Methods Medical school, matched residency program, and applicant-specific PubMed-indexed research productivity (including consideration for first-author publications, relevance to ophthalmology, and acceptance before application submission date) for 2020-2021 matched ophthalmology applicants were collected from publicly available websites. Statistical analysis was conducted using chi-squared tests and t-tests to compare research productivity between groups (gender, medical school tier, and ophthalmology residency program Doximity rank). Multivariate regression was used to analyze research factors associated with matching at the top 20 Doximity-ranked ophthalmology residency programs. Results Three hundred ninety-three matched ophthalmology applicants for the 2020-2021 academic year were analyzed with an average of 2.4 ± 3.1 (median: 1 {0-3}) publications, 1.0 ± 2.1 (median: 0 {0-1}) ophthalmic publications, 0.8 ± 1.4 (median: 0 {0-1}) first-author publications, and 0.5 ± 1.1 (median: 0 {0-1}) ophthalmic first-author publications. The applicants who matched at the top 20 Doximity-ranked ophthalmology residency programs were more likely to matriculate from the top 40 medical schools (63% versus 22%, p < 0.001), have more first-author publications at the time of application submission (1.1 ± 1.6 versus 0.7 ± 1.3, p = 0.044), and have more projects resulting in publications after submission (2.0 ± 2.5 versus 1.4 ± 2.3, p = 0.048). In multivariate regression, attendance at a top 40 medical school (adjusted odds ratio {aOR} = 6.07, 95% confidence interval {CI}: 3.56-10.5, p < 0.001) was a significant predictor of matching at a top 20 Doximity ophthalmology residency program, and no variables associated with research productivity were significant predictors. Conclusions There has been a consistent increase in research productivity among matched ophthalmology applicants. However, in multivariate analysis, the medical school tier was the only significant variable for matching at top-tier programs. More nuanced studies regarding the effect of research productivity on ophthalmology applicants are needed.

Gender Bias in Letters of Recommendation: Relevance to Urology Match Outcomes and Pursuit of Fellowship Training/Academic Career

To review applications to a single urology residency program to determine application characteristics predictive of (1) successful match into urology residency and (2) pursuit of fellowship training and/or academic practice after completion of residency. Our principal variables of interest were gender bias as assessed in letters of recommendation (LOR), personal statements, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE), race, and gender. Applications submitted to our urology residency program in the 2014 cycle were reviewed. Twenty-three variables were analyzed, including applicant demographics, application materials, and gender bias. Deidentified text from LOR, personal statements, and MSPE was evaluated for gender bias using an open-source gender bias calculator. A subanalysis of applicants who matched at a top 25 urology program was performed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify applicant variables associated with (1) match success and (2) fellowship training or academic employment as of September 2021. Two hundred and twenty-two completed applications were analyzed. First authorship of a published manuscript was significantly associated with greater odds of matching. Female gender and top 25 medical school attendance were both significant predictors of matching at a top 25 urology program. The number of first-author publications was associated with completion of fellowship training or current employment in an academic position. First-author publications are the most important preinterview determinant of match success and subsequent pursuit of academic practice/fellowship training. Certain applicant characteristics are associated with matching at highly ranked programs. Gender bias in application materials (including LOR) does not appear to exert a significant influence on match and early career outcomes.

Gender Trends in First Authorship of Academic Publications Related to Wolff-Parkinson-White Syndrome.

Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW) syndrome is a congenital cardiac preexcitation syndrome that arises from abnormal cardiac electrical conduction through an accessory pathway and results in symptomatic and life-threatening arrhythmias. The aim of this study is to analyze the patterns of gender representation among first-author publications concerning "Wolf-Parkinson-White syndrome" within the PubMed-indexed publications from "January 1, 1973, to December 31, 2022," based on country and year. On May 9, 2023, bibliometric analysis was performed. The phrase "(Wolf-Parkinson-White Syndrome)" was looked up in PubMed. It covered articles released between January 1, 1973, and December 31, 2022. Articles accepted in the year 2022 and published in Pubmed in 2023 were included in the study. A total of 138 articles were considered and included in our analysis. Among these articles, 29 (21.01%) were authored by females, while 109 (78.99%) were authored by males. To conclude, this research study reveals a rising trend of females in lead authorship roles within the field of cardiac arrhythmia research. However, it remains evident that there is a significant gender gap, with male researchers still outnumbering their female counterparts.

Gender Equality Trends of First Authors in Publications of Artificial Intelligence and Thyroid.

Thyroid diseases are diverse, ranging from benign conditions to potentially life-threatening disorders. Recently, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in evaluating thyroid disease has significantly enhanced medical research, diagnosis prediction, and algorithm development. Coupled with this advancement is the rising focus on the importance of gender equality in scientific publications. This study delves into the gender trends of first authors in papers related to "Artificial Intelligence and Thyroid" sourced from PubMed from 2003 to 2022, scrutinizing these trends based on both country and year. A bibliometric analysis was conducted on PubMed to retrieve relevant articles over this 19-year time span. Following this, the names and affiliated countries of the first authors were determined. The Namsor app, a tool for classifying personal names by gender, origin, or ethnicity, was then used to segregate the data based on gender. Statistical analyses were performed using the R software- ARIMA model and Fisher's exact test was applied to examine the correlations between gender and country of origin. From the 254 analyzed articles, 43.5% of the first authors were female, while 56.69% were male. The year 2022 saw the most significant number of female first-author publications. Intriguingly, the European Journal of Radiology was prominent due to its favorable gender ratio. Moreover, the association between gender and country was significant, with China being a standout. Limitations included focusing only on PubMed journals and using a third party for gender identification. Nevertheless, the study reveals a move toward gender parity in AI and thyroid research over the past 18 years, emphasizing the importance of sustained efforts for academic inclusivity.

Socioeconomic Status Diversity of Trainees and Faculty in Residency Programs: A Pilot Study in Plastic Surgery

The socioeconomic diversity of residents, fellows, and faculty members in any medical or surgical specialty is currently unknown making it difficult to understand socioeconomic status (SES) disparities and create programs to improve diversity. Additionally, the career trajectories of residents and faculty members who come from different SES backgrounds have not been explored. We have performed a survey-based research study to understand the SES composition and career trajectories of residents and faculty members within U.S. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) residency programs. An anonymous online survey was administered to 754 recipients within plastic surgery residency programs in the United States. Self-reported SES information such as household income prior to age 18 and parental education level was collected. Data regarding career trajectories was obtained through questions about away rotations and research productivity. A total of 196 fellows, and faculty members participated in the study, with an estimated survey respondent rate of 25.9%. Only 9.9% (10 of 101) of residents and fellows reported a childhood (under age 18) family income less than $40,000. When analyzing parental education and occupation (EO-status), 42.6% (43 of 101) of residents and fellows had at least 1 parent in an executive, managerial, or professional position with a doctorate/professional degree. Low-income and low EO-status were associated with increased utilization of federal and state assistance programs (p = 0.0001) and approval for AAMC's Fee Assistance Program (FAP) (p = 0.0001). Residents and fellows who identified as White were not as likely to be from low EO-status households as those who identified as Asian (OR 0.3 and p = 0.015 vs. OR 2.9 and p = 0.038). Residents and fellows from low EO-status backgrounds were more likely to take a gap in education (87% vs. 65.4%, p = 0.047) compared to their high EO-status peers. Notably, more current residents and fellows performed away rotations and had first-author publications during or before medical school compared to full professors (p = 0.0001). Understanding the backgrounds and career trajectories of trainees and faculty in medicine is essential, yet it has not been performed at the resident or faculty level. This survey is the first to demonstrate the lack of socioeconomic diversity in a specialty (PRS) and identifies variation in career trajectories among those from different SES backgrounds. Large-scale research efforts are necessary to understand current SES diversity and barriers encountered by trainees and educators from low-SES backgrounds in all medical and surgical specialties.

A Review of Medical Student First-Author Publications in Plastic Surgery.

The integrated plastic surgery residency match is a highly competitive process.If performed wisely, medical research is an opportunity to differentiate applications from peers, and productivity is closely evaluated by residency programs.In this study, the authors aimed to characterize medical student research productivity for integrated plastic surgery residency programs and their respective medical schools. To this end, the authors performed a retrospective review of senior author publications from the 81 integrated plastic surgery programs from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was a publication with a medical student as the first author.Secondary outcomes included the number of faculty from each program, the geographic region of the program, and the ranking of associated medical schools. It was found that the average number of medical student first-author publications and faculty members per institution were 14.0 and 11.0, respectively.There was a positive correlation between the number of faculty members and several medical student first-author publications for a program (R = 0.54, P < 0.0001). The average number of medical student first-author publications was higher in the top 25 programs than for the remaining programs (P < 0.001), and most medical student first-author publications in the United States were produced by 10 plastic surgery programs. From these findings, it was concluded that these programs associated with higher-ranking medical schools produce greater numbers of medical student first-author publications.These analyses of medical student academic productivity should be a highly useful guide for current and future medical students as they strategize their successful match into plastic surgery.

Impact of Gender and Underrepresented in Medicine Status on Research Productivity Among Ophthalmology Residency Applicants

Insufficient representation of women and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) students remains a problem among the ophthalmology workforce. In the residency selection process, research productivity is an important factor. We aimed to determine the average research output listed by applicants and assess for differences by gender and race. Retrospective cohort study. All San Francisco Match applications to the Wilmer Eye Institute for the 2019, 2020, and 2021 ophthalmology residency cycles were retrospectively reviewed. Each applicant's number of published research articles was recorded and subclassified into first-author publications in any field, publications in ophthalmology, and first-author publications in ophthalmology. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with successful publication. A total of 1376 applications were reviewed. On average, women had a greater number of publications in ophthalmology (2.08 vs 1.73, P=.05) and presentations (4.52 vs 4.09, P=.01) compared with men. Self-identified URiMs were less likely to list publications in ophthalmology (odds ratio [OR] 0.650, P=.05) and first-author publications in ophthalmology (OR 0.570, P=.02) compared to non-URiMs. Our findings highlight disparities in research productivity by self-identified URiM status. On the other hand, women had similar if not higher research outputs than men. Greater research mentorship and opportunities to support URiM students may facilitate the recruitment of diverse trainees to ophthalmology programs.

Diversity of researcher types and plurality of philosophical concepts in limnology – an essay

ABSTRACT Scientific research in limnology is intricately linked to philosophical aspects via research methodology, reasoning, ontology, and epistemology. However, the potential plurality of scientific approaches, and hence philosophical directions in our discipline, has seldom been discussed, possibly because philosophy and history in our discipline are only occasionally part of the curricula in limnology and ecology. Therefore, many researchers may not be aware of the fundamental philosophical basis of doing science. Here, I construct a set of 7 researcher types that reflect my perception of colleagues I have met during my career. I link these 7 types with philosophical concepts and streams in ontology, epistemology, and science philosophy to demonstrate that diversity of researcher types can be related to a plurality of philosophical thinking. I argue that the plurality of approaches is a precondition for successful scientific research that aims to address global challenges and to help understand the world. Therefore, fairly appreciating the contributions from all researchers involved in scientific work beyond first-author publications in general journals is mandatory; otherwise, scientific research and education might become funnelled into a subset of approaches too narrow to comprehend the world. Our International Society of Limnology (SIL), with its 100 years of history, must develop a framework and activities that unite researchers and their underlying philosophies to address global challenges for inland waters.